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

Re: FYI: draft-rfc-editor-rfc2223bis to agenda

To: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Subject: Re: FYI: draft-rfc-editor-rfc2223bis to agenda
From: Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 07:57:44 -0400
Cc: iesg@ietf.org
In-reply-to: Message from harald@alvestrand.no of "Fri, 05 Sep 2003 16:10:13 PDT." <119406637.1062778213@localhost>

> The RFC Editor has decided that they want to publish 
> draft-rfc-editor-rfc2223bis as Informational, rather than BCP.

Reasons? Just too hard to get community consensus? Unwillingness to do
so? I'm very much wondering whether/if there is a message being sent
here.

I'm also wondering where it leaves the situation with authors who had
comments, but do not necessarily feel like they were addressed
sufficiently. (I don't have direct knowledge of folks opinions here
other than to note that some substantial comments got sent in,e.g.,
from Klensin, and Bert's comments relayed from Mike Heard.

Thomas

Follow-Ups:
- Re: FYI: draft-rfc-editor-rfc2223bis to agenda
  - From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>

References:
- FYI: draft-rfc-editor-rfc2223bis to agenda
  - From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>

Prev by Date: Re: Policy Statement on RFC authors
Next by Date: Re: time conflicts
Previous by thread: FYI: draft-rfc-editor-rfc2223bis to agenda
Next by thread: Re: FYI: draft-rfc-editor-rfc2223bis to agenda
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread