Re: [ACL] Re: Last minute ACL stuff (was DAV:unauthenticated usage)

Ted Hardie wrote:

> It is not appropriate to make substantive changes to the document at 
> this stage
> of processing.  If this is a showstopper issue, you can ask the RFC Editor
> to stop processing the document, and get the WG chairs to call for 
> consensus
> on the changes.  The draft will then have to go back through at least
> IESG processing and possibly IETF last call.

IMHO, it's not a substantive change, and it's also not a showstopper. So 
if there's any doubt, let's not make it.

> Continuing to tweak the documents after they have completed processing
> is hindering this group's ability to get a stable specification.  It is 
> normal
> to find things as people implement and deploy, but if you never issue
> a final spec the number of people actually working with the documents
> will remain low.

Agreed. That's why we want to get the spec published (finally). So if 
there's any doubt about a particular change, let's not do it. Note that 
this is the only change that I'm aware that isn't a case of bug fixing 
or updating references.

Eric, would you agree not to do it (after all, you did ask for it), and 
just add it to a future errata document?

Regards, Julian

<green/>bytes GmbH -- -- tel:+492512807760

Received on Monday, 19 April 2004 14:03:54 UTC