Re: Review of: Characterization of Proposed Standards

I largely agree with what Barry is saying. Additional review is always helpful, 
but I'm pessimistic about getting relevant additional review. And I'm mostly 
thinking of the kind of people where this work started from; folk who would 
have a problem using RFCs as reference standards in, say, government 
procurement, but would happily go on using their computers with all kinds of 
Internet technology in them after speaking :-) I think the crux of the matter 
is to get our own house in order and be consistent between reality and our 
description of the IETF process. And this is what we're doing.

FWIW, my personal opinions on content: 

I am happy with the 3.2 as it stands, but also happy with Barry's suggested 
"by-reference" formulation.

I agree with Barry's description of why Section 4 is necessary.

Jari

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature