[rfc-i] Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-hoffman-rfc-author-guide-00.txt
julian.reschke at gmx.de
Fri Sep 3 11:08:07 PDT 2004
Alex Rousskov wrote:
> Thanks for clarifying my doubts! I believe the approach you are
> documenting is fundamentally wrong in IETF context. IMHO, RFC Editor
> SHOULD NOT accept drafts that require modifications. Nor should IESG
> review such drafts, for that matter. It should be authors responsibility
> to comply with all the rules, without spending precious IETF resources.
> And RFC Editor and IESG should be prohibited from wasting time on fixing
> drafts to comply with the rules.
More information about the rfc-interest