On 20/04/15 23:59, Barry Leiba wrote: >> To wit, I am not ignoring the process. >> >> Once a specific down reference to a particular document has been >> accepted by the community (e.g., has been mentioned in several Last >> Calls), an Area Director may waive subsequent notices in the Last >> Call of down references to it. This should only occur when the same >> document (and version) are being referenced and when the AD believes >> that the document's use is an accepted part of the community's >> understanding of the relevant technical area. For example, the use >> of MD5 [RFC1321] and HMAC [RFC2104] is well known among >> cryptographers. > > The problem is that as far as I can find, it hasn't been mentioned in > *any* last calls. I'm bummed: as I said, I don't think that doing > this helps anyone, and that we should change BCP 97 forthwith.
I think Joel's argument is that 4949 has been "accepted by the community" in that RFC6749 is 2.5 years old and nobody noticed. The "several last calls" above is just an example in the text also. I can buy into that. (If we go with that I'd say we can add 4949 to the downref registry with the oauth draft as the referring draft and leave the LC date blank.) S. > > b > > _______________________________________________ > Uta mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta > _______________________________________________ Uta mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
