[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: dead IDs in the RFC Ed queue

To: Bill Fenner <fenner@research.att.com>
Subject: Re: dead IDs in the RFC Ed queue
From: ned.freed@mrochek.com
Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2003 00:32:55 -0800 (PST)
Cc: sob@harvard.edu, iesg@ietf.org
In-reply-to: "Your message dated Sun, 02 Feb 2003 21:10:41 -0800"<200302030510.VAA14834@windsor.research.att.com>
References: <200302030510.VAA14834@windsor.research.att.com>

> http://rtg.ietf.org/~fenner/iesg/rfcq.html might be helpful when
> doing this kind of comparison.

> There are some pretty curious entries in there, like:

> draft-ietf-cdi-model-02.txt
>  IESG says: Publication Requested (2002-12-13)
>  RFC-Editor says: AUTH48
> (If it's really in author's 48 hours, the IESG doesn't have much time
> left to evaluate it)

This is Patrik's draft so I really don't know the specifics, but I do know
that I received an author 48 note for it on 30-Jan.

				Ned

References:
- Re: dead IDs in the RFC Ed queue
  - From: Bill Fenner <fenner@research.att.com>

Prev by Date: OPES note and ICAP IESG notes
Next by Date: Re: What review is required for "IETF Consensus"?
Previous by thread: Re: dead IDs in the RFC Ed queue
Next by thread: from rfc ed on "dead" IDs
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread