--On Sunday, June 27, 2010 20:56 -0400 Tony Hansen
<[email protected]> wrote:
> I would call this an excellent agenda item for Maastricht.
>
> Some of the documents are quite needy of a rev, irrespective
> of Russ' document's outcome. Deciding on the set of documents
> that make up that list would be one of the tasks for the WG.
> One of the interesting thing about using the pre-evaluation
> step is that we've forced people to think through the state of
> the documents and to get buy-in from the WG for those changes.
> None of the pre-eval docs so far have been contentious, but
> future ones may be more so.
Tony,
Per my earlier note, if the WG is going to go down that path, I
think it is important to distinguish between:
(1) In need of a rev because of specific issues that
require clarification.
(2) In need of a rev because the document itself is
sufficiently defective that it requires a complete
revision and replacement.
We are treating all documents as if they fall into the second
category because the procedures for advancement to Full Standard
more or less require that. But, if there were no "advancement"
goal, I think some (or most) of the documents would either not
need revision at all or would fall into the first category. For
it, it should be possible to issue an RFC whose substance is one
or more statements of the form "Section N.M of RFC nnnn says
"xxxx" but means "yyyy". And that would be a lot less work for
all involved than revising the documents.
I have to confess to finding myself significantly de-motivated
to spend time on 5321bis until the question of its fate
(advancements or not and to what) is sorted out, especially
since some of the changes that require the most work are in the
queue only because we had to promise them to IESG members for
the Full Standard version in order to get 5321 signed off. If
the IESG makes "Full Standard version" meaningless, there should
be no need to do that work.
john
_______________________________________________
yam mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yam
