On 6/9/10 5:47 AM, John C Klensin wrote: > a decision to publish the documents as RFCs implies RFC > Editor time, community time in Last Call, Author and AD time in > Last Call (and usually AUTH48), and so on. At least in > principle, that energy could be spent on the documents > themselves... and might be better spent that way. [...] > > While I may be missing something, I don't see the value > proposition that justifies that extra work in this case.
I too don't see a great deal of benefit from spending more cycles at this point in the standards process. It seems to me that the people who care about progressing these documents are paying attention within this WG, and that IETF-wide last call, shepherd reports, IESG review, IANA input, and RFC Editor work will not appreciably improve the pre-evaluation documents being produced here. Merely my two cents. Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ yam mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yam
