Re: Call for review of proposed update to ID-Checklist

From: Dave Crocker <dhc2 at dcrocker.net>
Cc: IETF Chair <chair at ietf.org>, ietf at ietf.org, iesg at ietf.org
Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2008 12:37:23 -0700
In-reply-to: <p06250119c4996f6c1a4a at [75.145.176.242]>
References: <20080708184427.5D55F28C0EC at core3.amsl.com> <p06250119c4996f6c1a4a at [75.145.176.242]>



Pete Resnick wrote:

     Yes, any I-D that uses ABNF must include a normative
reference to RFC 4234, but for the IESG to not engage in review until itis in there is silly beyond belief. Make a note to the author that theyneed the reference and continue consideration.

Hmmm. Mayhaps the doc should make its own clear and pragmatic distinctionbetween MUST and SHOULD, in terms of what is acceptable for immediateprocessing, with MUST restricted to immediate showstoppers?



d/

--

  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

References:
- Call for review of proposed update to ID-Checklist
  - From: IETF Chair
- Re: Call for review of proposed update to ID-Checklist
  - From: Pete Resnick

Prev by Date: Re: Call for review of proposed update to ID-Checklist
Next by Date: RE: Call for review of proposed update to ID-Checklist
Previous by thread: Re: Call for review of proposed update to ID-Checklist
Next by thread: RE: Call for review of proposed update to ID-Checklist
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.

Re: Call for review of proposed update to ID-Checklist

Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.