Tom.Petch wrote:
I recall a recent occasion when the IESG withdrew its approval, for
draft-housley-tls-authz-extns
a document that both before and after its approval generated a lot of heat,
within and without a WG.
Presumably the expedited process would, or at least could, have seen that
published as an RFC.
With that example in mind, a 60 day hold seems rather a good idea.
In that case, it went into the RFC Editor queue on June 30,, 2006, and
was yanked from the queue on February 26, 2007 - 8 months later.
According to the "third last call" announcement:
On June 27, 2006, the IESG approved "Transport Layer Security (TLS)
Authorization Extensions," (draft-housley-tls-authz-extns) as a
proposed standard. On November 29, 2006, Redphone Security (with whom
Mark Brown, a co-author of the draft is affiliated) filed IETF IPR
disclosure 767.
it was five months between approval and the IPR disclosure.
A two-month hold wouldn't have caught it.
(No idea why it was still hanging there long enough for the IPR disclosure to
catch up with it...)
Harald
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf