Thanks. I forgot to say on (c) that there MUST
be as many entries in the revision history as the
revision number indicates (i.e. none for revision
00, and so on).
don't do that. it will add an unnecessary and often useless barrier to
publication of I-Ds
I-Ds are supposed to be a quick-and-dirty mechanism for
circulating (sometimes quite rough) drafts among interested parties. we
don't need to impose a complicated revision history mechanism just
because we have two different cutoff dates for I-Ds. and there's
certainly no need to impose such a requirement on drafts that
(a) aren't WG work items and
(b) are submitted before the earlier cutoff date.
Keith
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf