W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2008

Re: i59

From: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de>
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2008 23:14:24 +0200
To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <g2k6ci$ptv$1@ger.gmane.org>

Lisa Dusseault wrote:

>> An "IETF review" excludes informational or experimental RFCs in
>> the "independent" (RFC-editor) stream, and it also excludes all
>> other non-IETF streams.  Both proposals exclude W3C standards.
 
> Some (most?) Informational documents do go for IETF Review.

AFAIK the IESG can still approve a "document action" without prior
IETF Last Call (= IETF review) for informational and experimental
RFCs, that was a stunt openSPF proponents weren't aware of when it
happened with four controversial letters in RFC 4406 vs. RFC 4408.  

http://www.ietf.org/IESG/STATEMENTS/iesg-statement-01-15-2007.txt
is "for selected draft Informational and Experimental documents".

How about adding this to a "known traps and pitfalls" page in the
IESG wiki, my crystal ball says that there will be a case when an
IESG forgets to "select" an I-D running into a "gotcha" appeal ;-)

 Frank
Received on Monday, 9 June 2008 21:13:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:48 GMT