![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
I think this is one of those cases where it's best NOT to have EVERY last process detail laid in stone. :-) Tony Hansen tony at att.com John C Klensin wrote: >> John, I don't see any text in RFC 2026 that gives an appeal >> suspensive effect. However, as a matter of common sense, I have >> asked the Secretariat to request the RFC Editor to suspend RFC >> publication. > > I don't see that text either. I suspect it was omitted because of > the possibility of denial of service attacks on getting standards out > (Scott Bradner, a comment on this might be helpful). But, because > publication of this with an implied recommendation to implement would > make any subsequent action on an appeal essentially moot, your common > sense solution is appreciated. _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf at ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.