Re: Should the RFC Editor publish an RFC in less than 2 months?

[Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf at mit.edu>]

>>>>> "John" == John C Klensin <john-ietf at jck.com> writes:

    John> --On Thursday, 29 November, 2007 09:54 +1300 Brian E
    John> Carpenter
    John> <brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com> wrote:

    John> I'd like to see something like the above combined with a
    John> shorter window, maybe at two levels ("hold publication
    John> until..." and "provisional until...").  Of course, if an
    John> appeal is actually filed, it would be sensible to hold
    John> publication until it is resolved.  

I disagree that it is always sensible to hold publication until the
appeal is resolved, particularly for expedited publication drafts.

We've had some very bogus appeals and writing up the responses is not
always our top priority.

I agree that it is almost always desirable to delay publication once
an appeal is filed.

One critical assumption in my evaluation is that RFCs can be
withdrawn.  I'm quite confident that given a court order the RFC
editor, the IETF website, etc, would find a way to remove an RFC.  As
such, we as a community can establish our own processes for
withdrawing an RFC.


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf