[rfc-i] Re: Status of draft-rfc-editor-rfc2223bis?
braden at ISI.EDU
Fri Jun 11 15:55:12 PDT 2004
*> > The RFC Editor at least aspires to keeping a good
*> >balance between consistency and flexibility.
*> This is good. However, the document in question is updating an
*> existing RFC that we working group chairs are supposed to enforce.
The RFC Editor is of course grateful for the efforts of the WG chairs
in preparing Internet Drafts that will become RFCs with minimum
additional work. However, the rules that WG chairs should be using
(pardon me, but "enforce" seems a bit overblown) are those set by the
IESG in IDChecklist. We have endeavored to ensure that IDChecklist is
as consistent with the final RFC rules, defined in RFC 2223bis, as
possible, reasonable, and useful.
I really think we are beating a dead horse here.
*> Having a correct new RFC is much better than saying "you must follow
*> this expired Internet Draft" to our document editors who we have been
*> trying to convince to keep their documents up to date.
*> --Paul Hoffman, Director
*> --VPN Consortium
*> rfc-interest mailing list
*> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
More information about the rfc-interest