The IESG is fine with all the changes except for the downreferences. The format is generally Ok, several ADs commented that the pre-evaluation document was useful.
The following paragraphs are about the process. The general view was that the IESG cannot really judge the process by doing a simple document. It doesn't make sense to approve extensions first, then run into the possibility of not approving changes to the document being extended. The WG should move the main documents first instead of the dependent documents.
The IESG would like to ask the YAM WG to evaluate a core document such as RFC 5321 or RFC 5322. It is viewed that the evaluation of these documents is more likely to highlight issues that might be relevant to all the other documents.
The next step the AD recommends is to review RFC 5321 and come back to 8BITMIME once the pre-evaluation of RFC 5321 is complete.
Please comment on the above. Regards, S. Moonesamy YAM WG Secretary
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.