Fwd: Do Not Publish message for draft-paskin-doi-uri-04.txt

[IESG Secretary <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>]

To the RFC Editor:

As you know, the IESG recently considered
draft-paskin-doi-uri-03.txt, sending a "do not
publish" note documenting the IESG's concern that this
work did not meet the requirements of RFC 2717, Section 3.2.
Concurrent with the IESG's consideration of the document,
the authors' submitted an update, -04.txt. After
discussion on today's telechat, the IESG has agreed that
the same basic concerns documented in our previous message
still apply, and we ask you to apply the same message to
the updated draft.

Thank you,

The IESG Secretary


^L
-------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2003 16:18:18 -0400
To: RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Informational RFC to be: draft-paskin-doi-uri-02.txt


To the RFC Editor,

The IESG recommends that The "doi" URI Scheme for the Digital Object
Identifier (DOI) <draft-paskin-doi-uri-03.txt> NOT be published as an
Informational RFC.  Please note that version -03, which was submitted on
May 8, 2003, is the version that was reviewed by the IESG.

This document proposes a top-level URI scheme, doi, and contains details
about the usage of this identifier in a community of use centered on the
International DOI Foundation. After receiving this draft from the RFC
Editor, the IESG requested that the URI be reviewed by the team at
uri-review@ietf.org to see if it fit within the guidelines established by
RFC 2717/BCP35. Though the authors and reviewers have had a productive
discussion of the draft, the IESG has concluded that this draft does not
meet the requirements of RFC 2717, section 3.2.

The IESG notes, however, that the original intention of those crafting RFC
2717 was to set up registration trees outside the IETF tree, in order to
enable registrations by those whose community of use lay largely outside
the context of IETF standards. After a long pause in the development of
those registration procedures, the responsible AD has asked Larry Masinter
to take on editorship of a proposed set of procedures for these
registrations. The IESG encourages the draft's authors to work with him on
those guidelines and, when they are complete, to register the doi scheme
in the non-IETF tree that they will set up.

Thank you,

The IESG Secretary