At 12:54 09.04.2000 -0500, Pete Resnick wrote: >You need to go back and read the message to which you are responding >again. Technical merit is specifically *not* a factor in deciding >publication of an Experimental or Informational document. For those who believe this, please check out the technical merit of draft-terrell-logic-analy-bin-ip-spec-ipv7-ipv8-05.txt, and ask yourselves if this should be published as an RFC. After that little exercise, you will appreciate that technical merit *is* a factor in deciding publication of an Experimental or Informational document. But - and this is important - THE DECISION IS MADE BY THE RFC EDITOR. All we're doing here is creating advice. Harald -- Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Re: recommendation against... Joe Touch
- Re: recommendation against publication of d... Dave Crocker
- Re: recommendation against publication... Keith Moore
- prohibiting RFC publication Dave Crocker
- Re: prohibiting RFC publicatio... Keith Moore
- Re: prohibiting RFC public... Peter Deutsch
- Re: prohibiting RFC public... Keith Moore
- Re: prohibiting RFC public... Martin J.G. Williams
- Re: prohibiting RFC public... Fred Baker
- Re: prohibiting RFC public... Pete Resnick
- Re: prohibiting RFC public... Harald Tveit Alvestrand
- Re: prohibiting RFC public... Pete Resnick
- Re: prohibiting RFC public... Harald Tveit Alvestrand
- Re: prohibiting RFC public... ned . freed
- Re: prohibiting RFC public... Pete Resnick
- Re: prohibiting RFC public... ned . freed
- Re: prohibiting RFC public... Dave Crocker
- Re: prohibiting RFC public... Pete Resnick
- Re: prohibiting RFC public... Peter Deutsch in Mountain View
- Re: prohibiting RFC public... Dave Crocker
- Re: prohibiting RFC publicatio... Karl Auerbach