Hi Jean,
At 08:47 AM 16-12-2024, Jean Mahoney wrote:
From the RPC side, there was concern that consumers of RFCs are
quite different from RFC producers, and it is not helpful to drop a
consumer with a question into the WG/RG process. The stream
manager response was that the integrity of the WG/RG process could
not be risked with a separate discussion forum, and therefore any
proposed new system should *not* aim to address the broader issue
of supporting RFC consumers who have a question, but solely
concentrate on errata reports.
Some time back, I noticed the "Discuss this RFC" on the "info" web
page for a RFC. The mailing list address to which the comment would
be sent was i...@ietf.org. I assume that is because the source of
the RFC was "non working group". I wondered whether it was optimal
to advertise the IESG email address as the contact point.
Regards,
S. Moonesamy
--
rswg mailing list -- rswg@rfc-editor.org
To unsubscribe send an email to rswg-le...@rfc-editor.org
