I don't suppose you guys could look at the "Guidance for Designated
Expert" in the draft and let me know if you have improvements?
On Thu, 24 Jan 2019, John C Klensin wrote:
--On Thursday, January 24, 2019 20:26 +0000 "Salz, Rich"
changes the registry criteria to Expert Review so you
don't need to
publish an RFC merely to register a new clause.
Spec required, so it's written down somewhere what it means?
An I-D is sufficient; you don't have to go through RFC
publication. Or will these things be "intuitively obvious" ?
As I have always understood it, "spec required" means a
published, stable, readily-accessible, etc., specification.
Not necessarily an RFC but, until the definition of an I-D is
changed to eliminate all of the "don't reference except as 'work
in progress'" and "expires in six months" stuff, it would be
unusual (and objectionable) for posting a spec as an I-D to
John Levine, johnl(_at_)taugh(_dot_)com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
ietf-smtp mailing list