Re: [INDEP] Preview of draft-iab-rfc-independent-00.txt

Mon, 05 Mar 2007 09:01:46 -0800 


Jari  wrote in response to Dave:


I'm very happy with that text. Please forget my
proposal on the IANA part.


Danny McPherson sent a few editorial comments after my submission as
well.

I will incorporate both sets of feedback in an update once the
submission window opens again.





So what is left is the second suggestion by Jari (copied below) and  
the editorials by Danny. I suppose that, if Danny's suggestions are  
minor and purely editorial, we could send those to the RFC-editor  
with version 00 (I wouldn't mind absorbing the slight delay that  
comes with waiting for the submission window to open).



Jari, I suppose that draft-iesg has a finished, or almost finished  
last call. I don't think there are any points raised that interact  
with this document, correct?



--Olaf

For reference the remaining item:


OLD:

   o  Documents considered by IETF Working Groups but not  
standardized.

      While many documents of this type are published via the IESG

      approval path (see RFC 3932, Section 1 [RFC3932]), the  
independent

      submission path has traditionally been open to them.  Because of
      their intimate connection to the IETF Standards Process and WG
      activites and the consequent sensitivity to exact statements of
      relationships and to timing, there is reason to believe that all
      such documents should be published only at IESG request.  In any
      event, these documents are published for the historical record.
NEW:

   o  Documents considered by IETF Working Groups but not  
standardized.
       While many documents of this type are still published in the  
IETF

       document stream [RFC2026,draft-iesg-sponsoring-guidelines] as
       Informational or Experimental RFCs, the independent submission

       path has traditionally been open to them as well. However,  
because

       of their intimate connection to the IETF Standards Process

       and WG activites and the consequent sensitivity to exact  
statements of
       relationships and to timing, there is reason to believe that  
such

       documents should normally be published via the IETF stream. In

       any event, these documents are published for the historical  
record.




-----------------------------------------------------------
Olaf M. Kolkman
NLnet Labs
http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/






Attachment:
PGP.sig

Description: This is a digitally signed message part


_______________________________________________
INDEPENDENT mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/independent






















					Reply via email to