Ned Freed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > And even if they have read tls-authz it is hard to take comments > containing oxymorons like "experimental standard" very seriously, > since such comments are a strong indicator of lack of familiarity > with our process or 2026 criteria.
While I am sympathetic to that sentiment, there is some evidence that people presumably well versed in IETF process and RFC2026 terminology can be sloppy in its application--from http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-announce/current/msg04120.html Subject: Third Last Call: draft-housley-tls-authz-extns From: The IESG <iesg-secretary at ietf.org> [...] The IESG solicits final comments on whether the IETF community has consensus to publish draft-housley-tls-authz-extns as an _experimental standard_ given the IPR claimed. (_emphasis_ added) -dan _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
