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

[Cullen Jennings <[e-mail]>]

What happens if the appeal is claiming that changes made in Auth 48  
should have been reviewed by the working group and go against WG  
consensus? Given some of the changes I have seen between IESG  
approval and published RFC, this seems like a reasonable plausible  
scenario.


On Nov 28, 2007, at 2:05 PM, Russ Housley wrote:

> John:
>
> RFC 2026 gives two months to appeal any decision.  IESG approval of a
> document publication is one such decision.  RFC 2026, section 6.5.4  
> says:
>
>     All appeals must be initiated within two months of the public
>     knowledge of the action or decision to be challenged.
>
> So, the two month timer begins when the approval announcement is sent.
>
> Russ
>
> At 04:02 PM 11/28/2007, John C Klensin wrote:
> >I don't see any possible reason why we need to give
> >people two months to get an appeal filed: a month or, at most,
> >six weeks ought to be more than sufficient.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
>

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf