IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Individual submissions and Informational RFCs

Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Sat, 10 December 2005 23:21 UTC

Received: from localhost.cnri.reston.va.us ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1ElE22-0001Em-R8; Sat, 10 Dec 2005 18:21:34 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1ElE20-0001Cv-FC for ietf@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 10 Dec 2005 18:21:32 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA15695 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 10 Dec 2005 18:20:37 -0500 (EST)
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([158.38.152.233]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ElE2S-0005gX-L0 for ietf@ietf.org; Sat, 10 Dec 2005 18:22:01 -0500
Received: from localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16B12259737; Sun, 11 Dec 2005 00:20:37 +0100 (CET)
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 09249-06; Sun, 11 Dec 2005 00:20:33 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [192.168.1.160] (163.80-203-220.nextgentel.com [80.203.220.163]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 841A7259725; Sun, 11 Dec 2005 00:20:33 +0100 (CET)
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 00:23:55 +0100
From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
To: wayne <wayne@schlitt.net>, ietf@ietf.org
Message-ID: <B0FCBC5090CCA25CF5D62A81@svartdal.hjemme.alvestrand.no>
In-Reply-To: <x464pwn8sm.fsf_-_@footbone.schlitt.net>
References: <20051209221401.9125.qmail@xuxa.iecc.com> <439A086A.10705@dcrocker.net> <x464pwn8sm.fsf_-_@footbone.schlitt.net>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.1.6 (Linux/x86)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at alvestrand.no
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: e5ba305d0e64821bf3d8bc5d3bb07228
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc:
Subject: Re: Individual submissions and Informational RFCs
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>
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org


--On lørdag, desember 10, 2005 11:47:37 -0600 wayne <wayne@schlitt.net> 
wrote:

> I just checked again, and in the last several months, I found over a
> dozen individual submissions and *none* of them were approved as
> Informational.  Most were Proposed Standard.  While some of them were
> the result of working groups that had dissolved and such, many (most?)
> were only reviewed by one or more working groups.
>
>
> Is this a change/evolution in IETF procedures from days-gone-by?

Actually it's an interpretation of RFC 2026, the basic rulebook for 
standards-track documents - so while practice may have varied a bit, the 
procedures are (in theory) the same as always.

There's an exposition of the various kinds of processing in RFC 3710, "An 
IESG Charter", which describes what the IESG thought the process for non-WG 
documents was like in spring 2003.

See section 5, especially section 5.2.1 and 5.2.2.

                    Harald






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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email