- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 20:50:59 +0100
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2012-03-06 20:43, Mark Nottingham wrote: > > On 06/03/2012, at 7:00 PM, Julian Reschke wrote: > >> My point being: when you say >> >> "... with the notion that if there are commonly-used values that haven't gone through IETF Review, they can be written up in a quick I-D and registered as Reserved." >> >> Do you *really* mean that is sufficient to write an ID, and *not* get it published as RFC? > > No. OK. But then I still don't understand the proposal: > Standard / Reserved / Obsolete > > ... with the notion that if there are commonly-used values that haven't gone through IETF Review, they can be written up in a quick I-D and registered as Reserved. If somebody writes that I-D and gets it published, why wouldn't the state then not be "Standard"? Best regards, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 6 March 2012 19:51:39 UTC