On 07-Mar-25 10:38, Paul Hoffman wrote:
Greetings again. draft-editorial-rswg-rfc9280-updates-00 Section 6, "Processing
Drafts from the RSWG", says:
%% Maybe clarify RSAB role in running the full-community last call, such as
deciding when it is finished, what the RSWG Chairs should do after that,
mailing lists, and so on. %%
Does someone want to make a first attempt at such wording?
Not yet, because...
Does anyone feel that this should *not* be covered in the update to RFC 9280;
if so, why?
The RSAB is already told it has to run a public last call, without being told
in detail how to do it, and that seems to be the appropriate level of detail
for a policy document.
On the other hand, I personally felt that their procedure for RFC 9720 wasn't quite
public enough, because it didn't involve any on-list dialogue between the commenters and
the authors. In the IETF case, I do value the fact that I can see that dialogue. But the
IETF doesn't specify this in RFC 2026 (which only says "Comments on a Last-Call
shall be accepted from anyone, and should be sent as directed in the Last-Call
announcement."). So my inclination is that we probably shouldn't over-specify this,
and trust the RSAB to do the right thing.
Brian
--
rswg mailing list -- rswg@rfc-editor.org
To unsubscribe send an email to rswg-le...@rfc-editor.org
