> 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. I agree with it. Barry
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.