[urn] call for comments: an alternative 2141bis document

[Andrew Newton <[e-mail]>]

All,

We have received a request for this working group to consider an
alternative to its adopted 2141bis document
(draft-ietf-urnbis-rfc2141bis-urn-03). That alternative is
draft-saintandre-urnbis-2141bis-00
(http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-saintandre-urnbis-2141bis/).
Additionally, some reviewers of our adopted document have expressed
concern regarding its unnecessary wordiness, especially in comparison
with the alternative.

Can participants of this working group please review both documents
and express opinions and provide comments as to the direction desired
for this working group in regards to a 2141bis RFC?

The two documents can be found here:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-urnbis-rfc2141bis-urn/
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-saintandre-urnbis-2141bis/

We will use the IETF standard of rough consensus to determine the way forward.

Finally, should the working group desire an alternative approach, we
intend to preserve and publish the historical and non-normative
information found in our current document. This information is
valuable and important.

-andy
co-chair, URNBIS