At 7:11 AM +0200 5/17/06, Robert Sayre wrote:
On 5/17/06, Paul Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This document describes an extension to an existing standards-track
document: it should either be on standards track or it should not be
an RFC.
Where is that written down?
RFC 2026.
Didn't Julian just get some WebDAV
extensions approved as Experimental?
Maybe, but that's irrelevant. The fact that some WGs don't follow the
IETF process doesn't mean we should do the same. If our AD (who is
also the AD for WebDAV) wanted this document to not be on standards
track, she would not have put out the IETF last call for the document
to be on standards track.
You seem to be saying IETF
participants don't get to have anything other than a black/white
opinion on the readiness of this document.
Correct.
I disagree, and I also
think it's kind of inappropriate for you to be managing discussion in
this way. After all, it's not a WG document, is it?
Nope, and that's why I said it as an IETF process weenie, not as WG co-chair.
I would have said
this should go Experimental, but it's not clear that the author is
willing to change the document in any meaningful way, so there's no
experiment to conduct.
If you want to change RFC 2026, that's fine, but this is not the
right forum to do so.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--Internet Mail Consortium
