IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Henrik Levkowetz <henrik@levkowetz.com> Wed, 05 December 2007 21:37 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 1J01va-0003hG-It; Wed, 05 Dec 2007 16:37:10 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J01vY-0003fs-A4; Wed, 05 Dec 2007 16:37:08 -0500
Received: from [2001:698:9:31:214:22ff:fe21:bb] (helo=merlot.tools.ietf.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J01vX-0005xB-U7; Wed, 05 Dec 2007 16:37:08 -0500
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45364 helo=chardonnay.local) by merlot.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from <henrik@levkowetz.com>) id 1J01vX-0004BT-6s; Wed, 05 Dec 2007 22:37:07 +0100
Message-ID: <47571A01.6050509@levkowetz.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2007 13:37:05 -0800
From: Henrik Levkowetz <henrik@levkowetz.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Macintosh/20071031)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: bob.hinden@nokia.com
References: <E1IxTPt-0006r4-ST@ietf.org> <4751F44D.3050207@isode.com> <E1Iye5A-0002sv-6J@megatron.ietf.org> <D9AE99FE-731F-4F55-B646-B26A6C8A4485@nokia.com> <7AC22E50348D3364BD9C2749@B50854F0A9192E8EC6CDA126> <28EF58DB-224B-4899-8E7C-0A938DA41B6C@nokia.com>
In-Reply-To: <28EF58DB-224B-4899-8E7C-0A938DA41B6C@nokia.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1
X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: bob.hinden@nokia.com, iab@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, iesg@ietf.org, henrik-sent@levkowetz.com
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on merlot.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
X-Spam-Score: -1.4 (-)
X-Scan-Signature: 79899194edc4f33a41f49410777972f8
Cc: iab@ietf.org, ietf <ietf@ietf.org>, iesg <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


On 2007-12-02 10:38 Bob Hinden said the following:
...
>> Based on the past record, we're talking about something that  
>> happens 0.58% of the time, or less.
>>
>> Of course, predicting the future from the past is iffy; there have  
>> been 10 appeals in 2006 and only one (not document related) in  
>> 2007, so "it varies".
> 
> Thanks for looking at the data.
> 
> It seems to me that we shouldn't be delaying all new RFCs for a  
> problem that only occurs .58% of the time.

+1


	Henrik

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email