Just to re-assert that the Independent Submissions Stream can publish
Informational and Experimental RFCs.
I am usually saddened when a piece of work that is clearly relevant for the
IETF is unable to get enough traction to be published through the IETF:
adoption by a working group is not
> On Jan 15, 2021, at 7:42 AM, Behcet Sarikaya wrote:
>
> Hi Eric,
>
> I am sure you know, all independent Submission documents can only be
> published as Informational.
They can also be experimental.
Joe
___
Int-area mailing list
Hello,
Yes, I agree that ISE is the sensible path to take.
The intended status was changed from Experimental to Standards Track in
-11, but Informational is fine for the moment. When/if SOCKSv6 gains
traction, we can issue a bis and change the intended status.
Thanks,
Vlad
On 1/15/21 5:52
Indeed, but as the current intended status is experimental ;-) it should not be
a problem
-éric
From: Behcet Sarikaya
Reply-To: "sarik...@ieee.org"
Date: Friday, 15 January 2021 at 16:43
To: Eric Vyncke
Cc: "int-area@ietf.org" , "vladimir.olte...@cs.pub.ro"
, "dragos.nicule...@cs.pub.ro"
Hi Eric,
I am sure you know, all independent Submission documents can only be
published as Informational.
I did not check what status the authors wish to have but it is good to
mention here.
Regards,
Behcet
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 7:55 AM Eric Vyncke (evyncke) wrote:
> Vladimir, Dragos,
>
>
>
Vladimir, Dragos,
While there was some interest in adopting the SOCKv6 document as an INT-AREA WG
document, the lukewarm interest and lack of reviewer volunteers [1] are
preventing the actual adoption of this document as a WG document (my AD
decision in agreement with the chairs). After
