Re: [rfc-i] Informational...

Michael StJohns <> Thu, 11 June 2020 20:04 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id EABB83A0CB7; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 13:04:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.451
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.451 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)"
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id O6V9qfMN3Ew0; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 13:04:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B0B3C3A0CB5; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 13:04:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B5CBF4071A; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 13:04:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EB8EF4071A for <>; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 13:04:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id C7v0a2otHIGI for <>; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 13:04:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::82a]) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D032F40719 for <>; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 13:04:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id d27so5588779qtg.4 for <>; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 13:04:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=UlETPMC0UNkvF41M+TyqSGwBzzerpGVgZATTALzjk+Y=; b=BBzAJtojm/V271Nzp08o/Le4kzRYy30qWx7YVH31rXEfzpbAwyqvIK6ng5ifC50flb fpfcL1jv6BHAr0PSfkO0+/110nPXw+QP02kXEa3YfTOT7k7zo+Wl8Muw83DwfBBam4G3 jKiG+zVW778GRgPMhBXK+6/etZIpOBpw0y/k4vOtAOvPvQUEH2kfzPx6KYrn1Y0c3Sb4 17kIqOtjtTzbAYq1Y246pf6OS5I8k1P4URikKu5L+eKgN6P5SZjvrqgQuFZIargQmXsT bwCTz32WfVtO7A0bwFK2OyXNfMZQkvW3w+7jsukz99ChyY5eQeb2nSN7wP03Z6lPaHjM lskw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=UlETPMC0UNkvF41M+TyqSGwBzzerpGVgZATTALzjk+Y=; b=R9v3wINyM9IdUA2DdMlWuzGKQO1t2Kt3rMAnETblv+iw/DeseoVwp6K0L6BxJaHIJX i5GkeIpLzZiUikL+DuBy/8Wj5xkmPuh6lfbN5QzKfdWFzFPcwC22zj0Mj0KijEurmR0d 1I0yoixic1Edt11C0aJCVIZ7HYzM8nBErauO4ZEb8gj8ZVU6oWoUF0JsiYeqq1LNfqRd yTC0qpTYWMzxlTrB8gbqLJaXravmMStpJSHIT7O435/C1qpRXMr0Yuui0Gh726HYiw8h sY4epsc+5sBBBr+UbOIpLnS9L0xaWj5cYir8F0WVNNoLIYJ2CY4UeaNbk/F5PLzOb8uQ Gu5g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530G6bs6cHlTW8vrlVfGe61bKXGaSultaUVoTiRuJd9m1QJBlteC RMCRFskiZ7TxeFNPixCU3+JeyRMwusM=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzaTgcIgiBiqv1qeNK9lifiqnJUdQi82J49jJwBVgwtTgSG+Krp59BfjdXvflYPmk4h4M5Iyw==
X-Received: by 2002:aed:3123:: with SMTP id 32mr10645162qtg.366.1591905874155; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 13:04:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ( []) by with ESMTPSA id t188sm3064876qka.27.2020. (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 11 Jun 2020 13:04:33 -0700 (PDT)
To: Wes Hardaker <>
References: <> <>
From: Michael StJohns <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 16:04:33 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Language: en-US
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Informational...
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
Cc: RFC Interest <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
Sender: "rfc-interest" <>

On 6/11/2020 1:00 PM, Wes Hardaker wrote:
> Michael StJohns <> writes:
>> I was looking at a document that's currently on last call for the
>> third time in the transport area with a proposed status of
>> "Informational".
> Do you think this sort of list would fall nicely into the larger picture
> of tagging/organization discussions that seem to be floating around a
> lot at the same time?

I do think it would fit in.   The question is how nicely given firmly 
held positions!

It's sort of why I sent the note and made sure it was on this mailing 
list rather than rfced-future.   In any event, it may be a way to 
provide the sub-text necessary without having to have a wholesale change 
in the flavor of the RFC series.

Later, Mike

rfc-interest mailing list