>>>> I'm sure that the wg is likely to be ok with wg drafts, but >>>> let's do the normal process. Please submit first as >>>> individual draft and we will call later for wg adoption. >>> >>> For whatever my opinion as a participant is worth, that would be >>> meaningless, time-wasting, ritual for its own sake. >> >> disagree. the step from individual to wg is the normal process and has >> no impact on technical work: the technical work can continue whatever >> the filename is. Let’s spend time on technical discussions on the >> content of the to-be-published draft. > > I have no preference, but to be clear the -00 versions will be exactly what > is in the published RFCs so that we can more easily track changes.
As AD for now, still, I'll say that I do have a preference, and a rather strong one: these are updates to documents the working group has already published. The working group has already decided to update them. Please just submit them as working group documents from the start. Even going through motions here makes a statement that the working group is not working on what it agreed to work on. Barry _______________________________________________ precis mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/precis
