At 06:59 08-06-10, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
> During IESG retreat 2 weeks ago several IESG members suggested that
> the WG publishes pre-evaluation documents as Informational RFCs
> using the standard IETF process. I think this is a reasonable request.
I disagree. These documents are essentially a collection of notes, nothing more.
They are poorly suited for archival use, and the effort needed to get them into
a state where they would be suitable would be better spent on other tasks.
The pre-evaluation I-Ds already have Informational as the intended
status. The template used mentions that:
"This Internet-Draft is not meant to be published as an RFC. It is
written to facilitate processing within the IESG."
If the I-Ds were to be published as RFCs, they would have to go
through an IETF-wide Last Call and the IESG would not be able to
process the documents as "Management Items". If the above request
was implemented, it would adds an additional two-weeks processing
time. It might also require a change in the YAM WG Charter as it is
stated that the WG consensus is obtained and the WG consults with the
IESG on the changes (and non-changes). The -bis I-Ds have to go
through an IETF-wide Last Call anyway and the IETF standards process
is followed.
Agreed on all points.
Ned
_______________________________________________
yam mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yam
