On 16-Oct-25 09:18, Alexis Rossi wrote:
On Wed, Oct 15, 2025 at 1:11 PM Brian E Carpenter <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I believe this is ready.
One possible tweak. The Introduction says:
"The RFC Publication Center (RPC) is responsible for implementing the policies
in this document, as described in [RFC9720]."
Maybe add something like:
"In case of ambiguity in these policies, the RPC will apply its best judgment
rather than delay publication."
That seems to be what people having been saying in recent messages.
I think 9280 already covers this in section 4.4 though [1] where the RPC can
consult the stream for stream-related issues or RSAB for cross-stream issues?
[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9280#name-resolution-of-disagreements
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9280#name-resolution-of-disagreements>
If it gets to the stage of a dispute, yes, but I was thinking of the stage before a
dispute. 9280 also defines the role of the style guide, which is probably where
"best judgment" comes in anyway.
I don't feel strongly about this; the text as-is works.
Brian
Regards
Brian Carpenter
On 16-Oct-25 03:39, Pete Resnick wrote:
> Apparently I am inept with the datatracker, so this message serves as
> the start of a 2-week WGLC for draft-rswg-rfc7997bis-05. Find the
> document here:
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-rswg-rfc7997bis/
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-rswg-rfc7997bis/>
>
> We've already had a few comments on the list. At the conclusion of the
> WGLC, I'll have Paul roll a -06 covering those comments and, if all
> looks good, I can toss it over the wall to the RSAB.
>
> pr
>
--
rswg mailing list -- [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
--
rswg mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
