Re: Documents need to conclude

[Dennis Glatting <dennis.glatting at software-munitions.com>]

On Thu, 11 Nov 1999, John Stracke wrote:

> Dennis Glatting wrote:
> 
> >         Once something is committed to paper in a WG a timer
> >         starts. The document has 24 months (6 IETF sessions)
> >         to either be sent to the IESG for advancement or
> >         with WG consensus the Chair petitions the AD for a
> >         two session extension, which can be extended in the
> >         same manner again. Otherwise the document is
> >         withdrawn.
> 
> ...and then someone else rewrites the document and resubmits it.  
> If they're straightforward about it, it's obviously the same
> document, and the IESG has to decide whether to apply the rule.  
> If they change it enough to be a different document, then they
> probably insert their own biases, and the WG has to argue it out
> again.  No net gain.
> 

It wasn't my goal to write a statement that could not be subverted.
The goal is everyone appropriate is engaged in the decision to extend
the life of a document. 


-dpg