On 7/23/2020 2:37 PM, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
It seems to me that the first place to do this is in I-Ds, even if we
do not have strict enforcement mechanisms. And if it is to be done in
I-Ds, it is up to the individual streams to do so. Having the IETF
discuss doing this for IETF i_Ds seems a really effective and sensible
starting point.
Yours,
Joel
Do you expect the IAB and IRSG and the ISE to also do an evolution like
this? For example: Should the use of "master key"be banned in CFRG
documents? Isn't that a lot of redundant work?
When you say "IETF discuss", I'm assuming you have a WG in mind to do
this work? Or are we going to stand up yet another WG? Or is the IESG
going to decide on its own perhaps with some community input?
Why would you not let the RSE or the Temp (John) manage the process of
updating the acceptable phrasings in the RFC series? Isn't that directly
in their job description?
Later, Mike
