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.  

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 ;-)

Received on Monday, 9 June 2008 21:13:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 1 October 2015 05:36:29 UTC