As well, if there is a conflict, it will certainly come out in IESG review or IETF Last Call.
On Feb 8, 2013, at 11:27 PM, Fred Baker (fred) <[email protected]> wrote: > Speaking for myself, I would say that an internet draft is relevant to work > in a working group if and only if it is covered by the charter of the working > group. Anyone can claim anything to dodge the requirement that they ask > relevant groups to review it. That doesn't make the claim true. > > In the event that you need a ruling, I would suggest discussing it with the > relevant chairs and, if necessary, ADs. Generally speaking, they will have no > axe to grind and can give you a reasonably objective answer. > > On Feb 8, 2013, at 7:56 PM, Abdussalam Baryun <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Hi folks, >> >> Related to one discussion with a participant about I-Ds affecting WGs, >> I have a question after reading two real incidents. The following two >> work process examples are to show the I-Ds/RFCs affects from >> participants point of view; >> >> 1) I got an understanding from one expert participant that his I-D is >> not related to one RFC, even though it does involve similar objectives >> and use-case, which was strange to me. So I understood from him that >> his I-D is not affected by that RFC, even though his I-D does not >> mention to exclude that RFC. IMO, I disagree with such producing I-D >> by separate review-approach unaffected by other related RFCs (i.e. not >> mentioned RFCs). >> >> 2) While I was discussing within a WG about an I-D which is a second >> version of one IETF prorocol, some participants thought that the I-D >> obsolete the old version even if not mentioned in the I-D. It then was >> requested to update and mention that it does not obsolete the older >> version. New versions are related and can affect each other, or affect >> people understanding, which requires more careful presentation for >> such I-D. >> >> I beleive that we have one source of producing RFCs, so all I-Ds and >> RFCs are related some how, and they affect each other. So when I >> review an item, I always like to consider all RFCs as much as I can to >> make Internet better. >> >> Is that approach right for review? please advise, >> >> AB >
