From the RFC Editor perspective, I’m hoping that this document will touch on
more than just the IETF stream. Both the IAB and the Independent Submissions
streams (but not the IRTF stream) contain Updates/Obsoletes. Not many, but they
do exist and should be accounted for.
-Heather
On September 15, 2016 at 9:11:40 AM, Joel M. Halpern
(jmh(_at_)joelhalpern(_dot_)com) wrote:
As the draft is probably about IETF process, not RFC Editor rules, I
would think that ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org would be the venue for discussing the
draft, unless Jari thinks it needs a separate list (which I doubt).
Yours,
Joel
On 9/15/16 8:58 AM, Andrew G. Malis wrote:
I noticed that as well in the announcement. The proper place to discuss
this draft is most probably rfc-interest(_at_)rfc-editor(_dot_)org
<mailto:rfc-interest(_at_)rfc-editor(_dot_)org> .
Cheers,
Andy
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 8:58 PM, Brian E Carpenter
<brian(_dot_)e(_dot_)carpenter(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com
<mailto:brian(_dot_)e(_dot_)carpenter(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>> wrote:
Note to Readers
This draft should be discussed on the wgchairs mailing list [1].
Um, no. That's a closed list.
Regards
Brian
--
Heather Flanagan
RFC Series Editor
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using AMPGpg