On 09/Jun/10 13:47, John C Klensin wrote:
>> [publishing pre-evaluation documents as Informational RFCs]
>
> While I may be missing something, I don't see the value
> proposition that justifies that extra work in this case.
+1. It would clutter the RFC series somewhat.
Agreed, but to be blunt I'm far more worried about the extra work for authors.
A conservative estimate is that this will triple the amount of effort needed to
put together a pre-eval document. I'm already having trouble finding the time
to do this work.
Ned
_______________________________________________
yam mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yam
