So, a clarification request:
Am I correctly understanding that the clear and public requirement
does not always imply a process RFC? In particular, John Klensin has
made an argument that there are a wide variety of matters that are
better handled by operational procedures made available for community
comment than by BCP document.
It's my reading that the IAB is interested in making sure that the
processes and rules are clear and public, not that they are all
codified in BCP.
I'm not looking for a formal response from the IAB but would
appreciate comments from its members.
--Sam
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf