Re: Introducing a Directory Service rejected as BCP

["Paul V. Mockapetris" <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

Speaking only for myself.

The rejected document did not define a clear case that could be either
approved or rejected.  It had a lot of raw information but no clear, much
less concise, recommendations.  If you want to have a discussion of why it
is vague or other misfeatures, several of the IESG members would probably be
ready to do so.  As a document which captures a set of experiences its fine,
as a recommendation it doesn't make it.

However, I also didn't want to get caught in the trap of "if we change this,
is it then approvable?"  Sometimes the IESG feels a document is close enough
that we can specify a set of changes which would suffice.  That isn't the
case here.

It would be a mistake of you to interpret this as the IESG will never
approve any document with any particular properties found in this one.  I
view the IESG's decision as not creating any precedent on subject matter one
way or the other, but rather on clarity and document style.

paul (new PHONE and postal addresses)

@Home                   main:    415-944-7200
385 Ravendale           direct:  415-944-7221
Mountain View, CA 94043 fax:     [phone]