[rfc-i] Technical changes after AUTH48

Tony Hansen tony at att.com
Tue Oct 16 08:16:29 PDT 2012

On 10/16/2012 10:49 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> On Oct 16, 2012, at 7:44 AM, Pelletier Ray <rpelletier at isoc.org> wrote:
>> I'm surprised this question is being asked.  I thought only editorial changes were made at this stage.
> Then you haven't been reading the diffs between the final drafts and RFCs over the years. Technical changes are made, although not "often".
>> Sounds like the doc isn't finished and should be sent back for the proposed addition of new substantive material and the appropriate list given the opportunity to comment, then back to the IESG and then to the RFC Editor.
> This causes another delay in publishing a valuable document that is, in many people's eyes, already overdue. Thus my question.

With other documents I've been involved in over the years where this has 
happened, we've always moved the state back to an earlier one while the 
technical decisions were being made, before recycling it back to AUTH48. 
Sometimes we'd do another WGLC for the changes, and other times we'd 
just go with a consensus call. But it was always understood that the 
draft was *NOT* in AUTH48 any longer while those decisions were being made.


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list