There is currently a DISCUSS for draft-ietf-yam-rfc4409bis-02:
<process weenie="">
The IETF LC
(https://www.ietf.org/ibin/c5i?mid=6&rid=49&gid=0&k1=934&k2=9680&tid=1314107697)
did not call out the downrefs to RFC 4954 and 5321. There is no doubt in my
mind that no one will object to these downrefs, but they need to be explicitly
called out in the IETF LC.
</process>
The intent of this message is to discuss the DISCUSS as there seems
to be a misunderstanding about down-refs. I do not consider it as
inappropriate for the AD to have lodged the above DISCUSS.
The argument for this DISCUSS is that the downrefs to RFC 4954 and
5321 have not been called out during the IETF Last Call. The quick
fix is to rerun the Last Call. That approach would not materially
affect the outcome.
I have pointed out during the Last Call that there are down-refs [1]
and provided a justification for them. Appendix B of
draft-ietf-yam-rfc4409bis-02 contains a RFC 4897 statement/ disclaimer.
I would be grateful if the IESG or Area Director can clarify the
DISCUSS criteria used [2] given that BCP 97 allows for annotations in
handling of normative references in Standards-Track documents.
If there is appropriate community review, is it acceptable to add a
downward reference even though it was not explicitly called out
previously? In other words, why should there be another Last Call?
Regards,
-sm
1. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg68421.html
2. http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf