Re: we are being UGLY!!!! - Re: FYI: draft-rfc-editor-rfc2223bis to agenda

[Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>]

Bob,

I guess I wasn't clear enough, but I was reacting to Harald's comment:

Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> writes:

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

Since it was last called to be a BCP, I'm curious as to the decision
to go back to info (since the decision to go for BCP originally was
presumably also made after considering the info vs. BCP question). How
has the thinking changed since the original decison? (I'm not
necessarily objecting, just wanting to understand.)

Bob Braden <braden@ISI.EDU> writes:

> The modified text has been republished twice, as announced at the IETF
> plenary.  We have had no feedback; if people have further problems,
> they will presumably raise them, and we will of course address them.

The above argues that the community is happy with the current
document. If so, why not BCP?

> RFC 2223bis will NEVER be finished, but we DO need to take a checkpoint.

I do agree with this!!!

Thomas