Bruce Lilly wrote:
Date: 2005-07-06 16:16
From: Joe Touch <touch(_at_)isi(_dot_)edu>
...
However, I'm not at all in favor of requirements to IDs that are added
ad-hoc; until this actually makes it into an RFC as a formal
requirement, it won't be in the word template I manage.
I wouldn't call it ad-hoc; it's part of an IESG-generated document on
the official IETF web site,
Which, as far as process is concerned, isn't quite worth the disk space
it occupies ;-)
and it also has been documented for quite
some time in the draft successor to RFC 2223 also known as
instructions2authors.
2223bis is still an ID. Until it's an RFC, this is just a *proposed*
change to process, and should be treated as such.
Joe
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf