[rfc-i] I-D Boilerplate Question (not related to IPR, promised!)

[Joe Touch]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> On 2009-02-01 07:54, Joe Touch wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>>
>>
>> Olaf Kolkman wrote:
>>> On Jan 30, 2009, at 7:24 PM, Joe Touch wrote:
>>>
>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Julian Reschke wrote:
>>>>> Joe Touch wrote:
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>> I like recommending - but not requiring - the WG name. People print
>>>>>> these docs out, and it's useful to know what the context of the work
>>>>>> is.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No harm if they don't follow it, though.
>>>>>> ...
>>>>> Indeed (I just upgraded rfc2629.xslt to mirror xml2rfc's behavior).
>>>>>
>>>>> Do we have a recommendation for non-WG submissions?
>>>> Individual?
>>> Sponsoring AD or Area?
>> Right; the phrases would be:
>>
>> 	IETF XXXXX WG
>> 	IRTF XXXXX WG
>> 	IRTF XXXXX Area
>> 	IETF XXXXX Area
>> 	IAB
>> 	Individual
>>
>> etc.
> 
> Please don't over-regulate. Can't we leave this to common sense?

It would be useful to _suggest_ what we're looking for, but not to
enforce it, of course.

I.e., no point in having it be guessed when we have a general idea of
what would be useful...

Joe
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkmGCc0ACgkQE5f5cImnZruBBwCghRJcy4rQSwAIF34g5tqV9xGr
t88AoPC1cX57uHdsQzO8QQ4TCemFEqMD
=JJEW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----