>Standard Track and BCP RFCs are part of the IETF document >stream. The proposed IRTF document stream (draft-irtf-rfcs) doesn't >create a new class of documents called IRTF BCPs.
Quite right. That's why we're having the argument here about draft-irtf-asrg-dnsbl-08. >Shouldn't the headings of the two documents coming out of the ASRG be >"Network Working Group" instead of "Anti-Spam Research Group" as the >intended category is part of the IETF stream? The boilerplate in the drafts is all generated by xml2rfc. I presume that the RFC Editor can adjust it appropriately. R's, John _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
