> I pretty much agree, although one form of discuss might be > reasonable: "This document needs to be recycled at Proposed > Standard because of the following *observed* interoperability > problem:...". > > In other words, once we have got this BCP out (soon, please), > the IESG should update the DISCUSS criteria specifically to > narrow them for the PS->IS transition.
I also pretty much agree, and the IESG discuss criteria document (http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html) would certainly benefit from a respin to provide guidelines for -bis documents and documents advancing further. However, as with most things I don't think there are hard and fast rules. I can imagine a very old RFC being respin or advancing where I'd want some rework. For instance, a vulnerability that was discovered after the orginal RFC should be described, perhaps even dealt with somehow. Jari _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
