ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: prohibiting RFC publication

2000-04-09 11:30:02
From: Pete Resnick <presnick(_at_)QUALCOMM(_dot_)COM>

...
Dave's message only said that technical merit has no bearing on 
publication of Informational or Experimental RFCs. He (nor anyone 
else in this thread as far as I can tell) mad no claim that we ought 
to determine technical merit on the basis of the vendors, nor that we 
base a decision for publication based solely on who those vendors 
are, nor that we fawn over vendors products. He suggested that we 
allow them to document current practice. Unless (cf. 2026) "the IESG 
considers that the document proposes something that conflicts with, 
or is actually inimical to, an established IETF effort" (which I have 
not heard out of the IESG yet), the RFC editor should (with the 
required changes of getting rid of "implied standardhood") publish 
the document.


Do I understand correctly that you think that 
draft-terrell-ip-spec-ipv7-ipv8-addr-cls-02.txt
should have been published as an RFC?

Since technical merit is irrelevant, you must be in favor of
publishing draft-terrell-logic-analy-bin-ip-spec-ipv7-ipv8-04.txt.
Do you prefer Informational or Experimental?


Vernon Schryver    vjs(_at_)rhyolite(_dot_)com



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>