--On Tuesday, 13 March, 2007 16:01 -0700 Andy Bierman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I was going to raise this issue, but I deleted the mail when I > realized > this is going to be an Experimental RFC (according to the > subject line). > > I don't think it harms interoperability to introduce an > experiment > into the mix. If deployment and useful tools follow, then > maybe > a later revision can move to the standards track. Andy, I just found Ted's note explaining that the writeup was just an error. These things happen and my reaction was a little strong (pre-IETF tension, I think). Certainly, making it an experimental document helps with the worst of the problem. I'd be _seriously_ upset if we were advancing it onto the standards track with as little context as we have. But, even for an experimental document, I still think it would be highly desirable to get some serious discussion about "why" and "when" into it to justify publication in any form. I think Ned's note summarizes the reasons for that better than I could. I also think that, if the author took Ned's note, Phillip's recent one, contemplated both for a while, and then turned the combination into a "rationale and context" section (with appropriate acknowledgements, of course), that none of us would have anything significant to complain about. best, john _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
