[rfc-i] Updating drafts that are in the RFC Editor's queue?
paul.hoffman at vpnc.org
Tue Apr 23 15:12:22 PDT 2013
On Apr 23, 2013, at 2:23 PM, "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" <rse at rfc-editor.org> wrote:
>> From the RFC Editor perspective, updating an I-D after a
> document/protocol action has been sent is discouraged, but not
> prohibited. This is not a common issue and can usually be handled by
> the RFC Editor reviewing a diff file between the approved version of the
> I-D and the updated version available via the Datatracker, and
> determining whether the updates are reasonable, need to be reviewed by
> the stream approver, or require a new document/protocol action (if the
> changes are significant).
> In the rare case in which a new version of an I-D is made available
> after an editor has worked on it, the RFC Editor reviews the diff files
> to determine whether the changes and workload are reasonable (folding
> changes into the edited document) or whether approving body should be
> notified that significant changes have been made that require approval
> and will impact the document's progress through the queue.
Thanks, that sounds imminently reasonable. It is a useful guideline for people who start stacking up non-editorial changes for AUTH48; they can ask their AD or stream manager if they can instead turn in a new draft, and that can be managed with the RFC Editor.
In the case that sparked this question, I'm fairly sure the RFC Editor hadn't even looked at the draft, and it was quite useful for other folks to see the changes as I-D diffs.
More information about the rfc-interest