[Top] [All Lists]

Re: I-D ACTION:draft-kucherawy-sender-auth-header-02.txt

2005-05-10 19:41:39

On 5/10/05, Bruce Lilly <blilly(_at_)erols(_dot_)com> wrote:

On Tue May 10 2005 04:50, Frank Ellermann wrote:

Bruce Lilly wrote:

Scott H. wants us to use the new 2234bis in the References.

A normative reference would hold up publication, as the 2234
successor isn't yet a published RFC.


It's not that I necessarily agree, but it's also not an issue
where I'd risk a debate with an AD if I care about the draft.

"Pay the AD now or pay the RFC Editor later".  The RFC Editor will
hold up publication as an RFC until all normative references are

Seems unlikely that any newly-approved document is going to leapfrog
the already-approved 2223bis in the RFC Editor's queue, and then get
blocked by it.

It's true that in the reference, it's not obivous that it's as stable
and has as much of the IETF-approved imprimateur as the RFC does; this
is at least partly a symptom of the RFC publication process taking so
long =(