Phillip, > Looks to me as if the cut off is start of business for the RFC Editor. > That makes sense to me, no matter how much you try to change the cut > off you can't make it any later than the point where the editor needs > to start work.
No, the RFC Editor does not edit drafts after the cutoff, they edit drafts after they have been approved... > I would not mind seeing the -00 cutoff moving to the same as the > cuttoff for subsequent drafts. At this point we have the automated > submission tool and the rationale for the difference is removed somewhat. The rationale for a different cutoffs for -00 and later revisions is simply that completely new ideas require a lot of time to digest. You can make modifications still for another week. (That being said, I've recently run into a few cases where it is not possible to submit a revised draft to fix an issue raised in IETF LC or IESG review -- even if the draft in question would not even be discussed in the upcoming meeting. Our deadline system is a rather crude scheme to prevent everyone submitting their only updates on the Monday morning of the IETF.) > Make the week earlier -00 cutoff apply to manual processing of -00 drafts. I'd rather just keep both the same. You may have to revert to the manual submission method if there's some kind of a problem in the tool, for instance. And I'd rather move into the direction of less deadlines than more... Jari _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
