[rfc-i] Fwd: Comment on headers-and-boilerplates

Joe Touch touch at ISI.EDU
Mon Dec 8 12:08:17 PST 2008

Hash: SHA1

AOK - thanks for the clarification...


Jari Arkko wrote:
> Joe,
>> Does this distinguish individual submissions with no IETF relationship
>> from those submitted independently that are handled within the IETF?
>> E.g., there are areas that lack WGs (e.g., INT, vs. RTG and TSV, both of
>> which have 'default' WGs). Documents can come out of that area's
>> meetings, having been discussed, which cannot be tagged
>> draft-ietf-wgname, but which aren't quite 'individual' in the sense
>> above.
>> How are those to be labelled?
> Yes, these two categories are handled in different ways. The documents
> submitted via the RFC Editor without any IETF relationship are called
> independent submissions. IETF documents without a supporting WG are
> called individual submissions. ADs regularly sponsor the latter to RFCs,
> for more information see [1]. This includes IETF Last Call review and
> may include specific review on some specific list. For instance, INTAREA
> is not a WG but we often talk about documents that Mark and I sponsor on
> that meeting & list.
> Jari
> [1] http://www.ietf.org/IESG/STATEMENTS/ad-sponsoring.html
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list