On Mon, 16 Jan 2006, The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from the Geographic Location/Privacy WG to
consider the following document:
- 'Location Types Registry '
<draft-ietf-geopriv-location-types-registry-03.txt> as a Proposed Standard
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Please send any comments to the
iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org or ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org mailing lists by
2006-01-30.
The file can be obtained via
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-geopriv-location-types-registry-03.txt
What I would like to know is how a document that creates a registry can be
considered for Proposed Standard, as opposed to BCP. A Proposed Standard is
supposed to be something that can be advanced on the standards track. How on
Earth does one have multiple interoperable genetically unrelated
implementations of a registry?
//cmh
P.S. Yes I know we do this all the time but that does not mean that it
makes sense!
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf