At 07:14 PM 11/22/2009, Tony Hansen wrote:
There is a meta question that needs to be answered about draft-ietf-yam-5321bis-smtp-pre-eval before we can WGLC it. It was raised as part of Alessandro's posting, but no one has been addressing it. To whit:Should our pre-evaluations provide an overview of known errata and how they are going to be dealt with?
Errata are generally discussed within the Working Group which then decides whether they are to be included in the next document update. That's part of the pre-evaluation that this Working Group is doing. I think that errata should be treated as other proposed changes and non-changes. The WG can deal with in on a case to case basis. If we know that changes are going to occur or if the issue seems controversial, it can be documented in the pre-evaluation I-D.
Regards,-sm
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.