At 0:06 +0100 1/24/07, Henrik Levkowetz wrote:
So the answer is that the requirements for this are in the ID-Checklist, which
applies to drafts that are submitted for IESG consideration, rather than in
the ID-Guidelines (http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-guidelines.html) which apply
to draft submitted to internet-drafts(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org in general.
The ID-Checklist is referenced from the same page you referred to earlier,
http://www.ietf.org/ID.html, a couple of lines below the reference and link to
the ID-Guidelines.
You're right, and I noticed all of that.
What made this mysterious to me was why I failed to see my
submissions get announced for some time. I never got any official
feedback so I began to assume that the nits tool was the official
word. After all, one recommendation was to just use the XML2RFC tool
and not bother interpreting the requirements.
Apparently my draft did finally get announced - although I haven't
checked to see which version came out. (I.e., which -00, differing
in boilerplates.) What I'm trying to vent here is a plea to make the
instructions for submitting a draft a bit clearer, for instance,
recommend a run of the nits tool and also say whether or not the nits
tool's assessment is binding or not.
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis +1-571-434-5468
NeuStar
Dessert - aka Service Pack 1 for lunch.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf