On 6/2/11 4:45 PM, Scott Brim wrote:
On Jun 2, 2011 4:05 PM, "John C Klensin" <john-ietf(_at_)jck(_dot_)com
<mailto:john-ietf(_at_)jck(_dot_)com>> wrote:
>But for the "no one cares about it any more" cases, it seems like a
> lighter-weight procedure, such as a Last Call on the question
> "does anyone believe that our impression that no one cares is
> incorrect?" might be in order (and much closer to the procedure
> that was used when (and before) 2026 was adopted.
Agree, but producing such a "no one cares anymore" RFC and getting it
through the process should be lightweight enough already. It should
slide right through. I hope we don't need yet another special process
because our normal process is too heavy.
I have no strong opinion on what exactly we should do on this point, but
the IESG can already do exactly what John wants with no change to
process. (See the end of 2026 sec. 6.2.) We would just have to decide to
do it.
pr
--
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf