Re: Should the RFC Editor publish an RFC in less than 2 months?

Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com> Sat, 01 December 2007 23:55 UTC

Return-path: <ietf-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IycAv-0004AF-Ve; Sat, 01 Dec 2007 18:55:09 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IycAs-00049D-H8; Sat, 01 Dec 2007 18:55:06 -0500
Received: from rufus.isode.com ([62.3.217.251]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IycAq-000143-U1; Sat, 01 Dec 2007 18:55:06 -0500
Received: from [192.168.1.129] (S0106005018446c5d.vc.shawcable.net [24.85.75.120]) by rufus.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPA id <R1H0VQB-qDjH@rufus.isode.com>; Sat, 1 Dec 2007 23:55:03 +0000
Message-ID: <4751F44D.3050207@isode.com>
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2007 23:54:53 +0000
From: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050915
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
To: ietf@ietf.org
References: <E1IxTPt-0006r4-ST@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <E1IxTPt-0006r4-ST@ietf.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 0bc60ec82efc80c84b8d02f4b0e4de22
Cc: iab@ietf.org, iesg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Should the RFC Editor publish an RFC in less than 2 months?
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

Russ,

IETF Chair wrote:

>While we figure out what policy we want, I have asked the RFC Editor to
>not publish any IESG approved documents until their appeal timer has
>expired.  I also challenged the RFC Editor to move things along so fast
>that this matters.  I suspect they can.  Which means that the whole IETF
>community needs to help the leadership figure out the appropriate policy
>before the rapid processing of Internet-Draft documents into RFCs becomes
>the norm.
>  
>
I would like to ask a clarifying question: does this mean that RFC 
editors are not going to start editing the document until after 2 months 
since approval of a document, or does it mean that RFC editors start 
editing right away, can issue AUTH48 request, but will delay publication 
until after 2 months?

I think the latter is better, because (a) appeals are not that frequent 
and (b) AUTH48 usually takes way longer than 2 days ;-).

Regards,
Alexey

P.S. I apologize in advance for asking the question before reading the 
whole thread. Maybe it was already asked.


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf