Re: Review of: Characterization of Proposed Standards

Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> Sat, 02 November 2013 22:19 UTC

Return-Path: <barryleiba@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4353011E8258 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Nov 2013 15:19:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.957
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.957 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.021, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NvmTAHsn33J5 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Nov 2013 15:19:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qc0-x22c.google.com (mail-qc0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c01::22c]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5462211E824B for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 2 Nov 2013 15:19:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qc0-f172.google.com with SMTP id c9so3240433qcz.17 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 02 Nov 2013 15:19:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=xyQ05XDNHJClRiOO+GGB1mBebCvdR7c+HYUKXyZJBDY=; b=QqDC7NIip0+Aqek1RGFdxO6HogTpSZ2qMXRiQ0bTRx0qqavC/e4xrrVjgq48TO1aGP SeNNxR4alOkdyrBONZ/6Ab6CwhuNFMupYiMZJzHZmQ/2ghTuCANm3Jn2TtD1h7yJN+6R OWAJl9SKNHDjHw/nlm4QhL/uNr4Hi/Z+OKtYS0UvLo5gOZ/rsfscnkvX6QPONICY1njR k5I+i+pZdMD/xWzLVdsMndPGC8v+gJKabL98ocWzIuY+loBfvhFVBKVSyaPW4CQhxjkP iG0meHng0ktYvRCvXc97w2MrVdqcOlYR/WJ4fLgkRnzXIzcbCZ0zU8vnOTwucrxhedM2 8zpw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.49.59.44 with SMTP id w12mr12611484qeq.57.1383430751822; Sat, 02 Nov 2013 15:19:11 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: barryleiba@gmail.com
Received: by 10.224.67.130 with HTTP; Sat, 2 Nov 2013 15:19:11 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <40AFC5D09A1926489ECFED9D7633D98A200655@ESESSMB307.ericsson.se>
References: <5269209F.3060706@dcrocker.net> <B4B31C25-C472-41B3-AAF8-96670E0E243F@NLnetLabs.nl> <52729C1D.7010400@dcrocker.net> <CAC4RtVCewEKatJKJnBbCqgsuBjHCOHY49WoTx+y-K_zDt+Smxg@mail.gmail.com> <34A065A2-516B-4033-BCAF-E0811698E6A6@NLnetLabs.nl> <5274FE3B.9060501@dcrocker.net> <40AFC5D09A1926489ECFED9D7633D98A200655@ESESSMB307.ericsson.se>
Date: Sat, 02 Nov 2013 18:19:11 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: BWM6jQ9np2NjaRNJDnGrqCzC-MY
Message-ID: <CALaySJKQmuPk_tOEktndUR8g84f_XxZEajKeg8ez14SsfjUYpw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Review of: Characterization of Proposed Standards
From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
To: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@ericsson.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: "<draft-kolkman-proposed-standards-clarified.all@tools.ietf.org>" <draft-kolkman-proposed-standards-clarified.all@tools.ietf.org>, "<dcrocker@bbiw.net>" <dcrocker@bbiw.net>, IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 Nov 2013 22:19:17 -0000

>> Perhaps:
>>
>>   4.  Further Considerations
>>
>>   Occasionally the IETF may choose to publish as Proposed Standard a
>>   document that contains areas of known limitations or challenges.  In
>>   such cases any known issues with the document will be clearly and
>>   prominently communicated in the document, for example in the
>>   abstract, the introduction, or a separate section or statement.
>
> Seems reasonable to me.

I agree; that's a fine way to put it, and thanks.

Barry