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

Re: Issue with -00 cut-off

To: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, mrw@windriver.com
Subject: Re: Issue with -00 cut-off
From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 16:39:12 -0400
Cc: iesg@ietf.org
In-reply-to: <109250000.1055360575@askvoll.hjemme.alvestrand.no>
References: <200306111642.h5BGgas22009@windsor.research.att.com><200306111642.h5BGgas22009@windsor.research.att.com>

Harald:

Is it OK if, in order to simplify procedures for the secretariat, we say that -00 requests in "late week" have to be WG documents, and come in email FROM the chairs?

Since -00 drafts already need WG Chair approval, I would prefer to keep the rules simple. How about:

Individual -00 documents 3 weeks prior to IETF.
WG -00 document 2 weeks prior to IETF. (Still require WG Chair approval)

Russ

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Issue with -00 cut-off
  - From: Margaret Wasserman <mrw@windriver.com>

References:
- Re: Issue with -00 cut-off
  - From: Bill Fenner <fenner@research.att.com>
- Re: Issue with -00 cut-off
  - From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>

Prev by Date: Re: Issue with -00 cut-off
Next by Date: draft-ietf-multi6-multihoming-requirements-06.txt
Previous by thread: Re: Issue with -00 cut-off
Next by thread: Re: Issue with -00 cut-off
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread