C. M. Heard wrote:
On Thu, 1 Jun 2006, Eric Rosen wrote:
There are also other reasons why I find this proposed experiment
disheartening.
For one thing, it really misses the point. We need to simplify our
processes, not make them more complicated. Either we need the
--On Monday, 12 June, 2006 12:20 +0200 Brian E Carpenter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
The real underlying problem of course is the the
multi-stage standards process is just a relic from another
time, and makes no sense at all in the current environment.
Experiments in fine tuning the
I think this experiment is a good idea.
While we have discussed throwing out the whole structure, we have not
agreed to do so. (I happen to not like the 1-step proposals, but
that is not the point.)
Whether we eventually throw out the whole thing or not, in teh mean
time this improves our
--On Monday, 12 June, 2006 12:20 +0200 Brian E Carpenter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
The real underlying problem of course is the the
multi-stage standards process is just a relic from another
time, and makes no sense at all in the current environment.
Experiments in fine
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006, John C Klensin wrote:
FWIW, I still think the approach in the draft is a good idea
given that...
(1) We have not been able to get consensus eliminating a
multistep standard process. For reasons explained elsewhere, I
personally consider that eliminating that process would
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action.
If the individual submission is approved as an Experimental RFC, does that
mean that the IETF will adopt the proposed experiment? If so, I don't
think this draft should be approved.
--On Thursday, 01 June, 2006 10:49 -0400 Eric Rosen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and
solicits final comments on this action.
If the individual submission is approved as an Experimental
RFC, does that mean that the IETF will adopt
that text is not derogatory, but a simply statement of fact.
Sorry, but however you may try to talk your way out of it, a statement like
that technology may be unstable is derogatory.
Until and unless the definitions of maturity levels are changed, that text
is not derogatory, but a
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider the
following document:
- 'A Process Experiment in Normative Reference Handling '
draft-klensin-norm-ref-01.txt as an Experimental RFC
This is a proposed process experiment under RFC 3933.
The IESG plans to make a
