Thanks Warren! I cleared.
Alvaro. On August 23, 2021 at 6:02:16 PM, Warren Kumari ([email protected]) wrote: On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 5:41 PM Alvaro Retana via Datatracker < [email protected]> wrote: > Alvaro Retana has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc7816bis-10: Discuss > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc7816bis/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > DISCUSS: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > This is a process DISCUSS (directed at the responsible AD). > > The datatracker indicates that the intended status of this document is > Internet > Standard. However, two process points are not being followed: > > 1- The replaced document (rfc7816) is an Experimental RFC. According to > rfc6410, the Standards Track maturity levels first go through a Proposed > Standard. > > 2- rfc6410 requires a 4-week IETF LC to move to Internet Standard, but the > LC > for this document lasted only 2. > > Moving the intended status of this document to Proposed Standard would be > one > way to address this DISCUSS. > > Whoops, this was my oversight, it was intended to be PS (and I confirmed with one of the authors). I;ve updated it in the DT. W -- The computing scientist’s main challenge is not to get confused by the complexities of his own making. -- E. W. Dijkstra
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
