Re: [INDEP] Re: Last call on draft-klensin-independent...

[Bob Braden <braden at ISI.EDU>]

  *> I did note an issue which I think could use more clarification in this document,
  *> which is whether the Independent Submission track is solely for 
  *> publication of Informational/Experimental RFCs, or whether it can be also 
  *> used to publish BCPs or Standards track RFCs.   I would like to see an 
  *> explicit statement in the document saying that the process only applies to 
  *> Informational/Experimental documents, and cannot be used for other 
  *> purposes.

Bernard,

Certainly everyone understands this, and I thought that 2026 already
stated it.  Whatever. It is not clear that this is the correct place
for defining legal mappings of document streams onto RFC categories,
but as a pragmatic matter, fine, let's make sure draft-klensin is
explicit about what categories are allowed.

  *> 
  *> RFC 3932 Section 1 says that it solely concerns "RFC Editor
  *> documents to Experimental/ Informational" status.  This implies that
  *> the process defined in that document can't be used for Standard track 
  *> documents, but it doesn't preclude other documents from specifying such a 
  *> process.  Given this, I would like to make sure that 

Wow!! You have missed a calling as a lawyer!! Or ARE you a lawyer?
That implication seems far-fetched to me, and clearly was not intended.

Bob Braden

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