Internet Engineering Task Force Statements Of Boredom (SOBs)
A satirical proposal for an RFC subseries that approves and then discards documents.
Lyman Chapin, A. and C. Huitema, "Internet Engineering Task Force Statements Of Boredom (SOBs)", RFC 1438, DOI 10.17487/RFC1438, April 1993, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1438>.
@misc{rfc1438,
series = {Request for Comments},
number = 1438,
howpublished = {RFC 1438},
publisher = {RFC Editor},
doi = {10.17487/RFC1438},
url = {https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1438},
author = {A. Lyman Chapin and C. Huitema},
title = {{Internet Engineering Task Force Statements Of Boredom (SOBs)}},
pagetotal = 2,
year = 1993,
month = apr,
} RFC text
Contents
Network Working Group L. Chapin
Request for Comments: 1438 BBN
C. Huitema
INRIA
1 April 1993
Internet Engineering Task Force
Statements Of Boredom (SOBs)
Status of this Memo
This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does
not specify an Internet standard. Distribution of this memo is
unlimited.
Discussion
The current IETF process has two types of RFCs: standards track
documents and other RFCs (e.g., informational, experimental, FYIs).
The intent of the standards track documents is clear, and culminates
in an official Internet Standard. Informational RFCs can be
published on a less formal basis, subject to the reasonable
constraints of the RFC Editor. Informational RFCs are not subject to
peer review and carry no significance whatsoever within the IETF
process.
The IETF currently has no mechanism or means of publishing documents
that express its deep concern about something important, but
otherwise contain absolutely no useful information whatsoever. This
document creates a new subseries of RFCs, entitled, IETF Statements
Of Boredom (SOBs). The SOB process is similar to that of the normal
standards track. The SOB is submitted to the IAB, the IRSG, the
IESG, the SOB Editor (Morpheus), and the Academie Francais for
review, analysis, reproduction in triplicate, translation into ASN.1,
and distribution to Internet insomniacs. However, once everyone has
approved the document by falling asleep over it, the process ends and
the document is discarded. The resulting vacuum is viewed as having
the technical approval of the IETF, but it is not, and cannot become,
an official Internet Standard.
References
[1] Internet Activities Board, "The Internet Standards Process", RFC
1310, IAB, March 1992.
[2] Postel, J., Editor, "IAB OFFICIAL PROTOCOL STANDARDS", RFC 1410,
IAB, March 1993.
Security Considerations
Security issues are not discussed in this memo, but then again, no
other issues of any importance are discussed in this memo either.
Authors' Addresses
A. Lyman Chapin
Bolt, Beranek & Newman
Mail Stop 20/5b
150 Cambridge Park Drive
Cambridge, MA 02140
USA
Phone: 1 617 873 3133
EMail: Lyman@BBN.COM
Christian Huitema
INRIA, Sophia-Antipolis
2004 Route des Lucioles
BP 109
F-06561 Valbonne Cedex
France
Phone: +33 93 65 77 15
EMail: Christian.Huitema@MIRSA.INRIA.FR
ISO Plain Language
On this page
§1A New Category for Nothing
The memo describes standards-track and other RFCs, then proposes an additional category for documents that express deep concern about something but contain no useful information. It names the proposed subseries IETF Statements Of Boredom, or SOBs.
The proposal invents a category for documents whose only purpose is to express concern without useful content. The name is IETF Statements Of Boredom.
§2The SOB Review Process
The fictional process sends an SOB to the IAB, IRSG, IESG, an SOB Editor named Morpheus, and the Academie Francais for review and other formal steps. Once everyone has approved the document by falling asleep over it, the process ends and the document is discarded.
The RFC says the resulting vacuum is viewed as having technical approval but is not, and cannot become, an official Internet Standard.
The proposed reviewers perform formal steps, then approve the document by falling asleep. The document is discarded, so the result is a vacuum rather than a standard.
§3Status of the Memo
RFC 1438 provides information and does not specify an Internet standard. Its description of a new subseries is presented as satire of the RFC process.
This memo uses a fictional process to make fun of standards procedures. It does not establish an Internet standard.