I read the Abstract and thought 'So what? This is fairly pointless.'
Moving on to the Introduction, I found that it made sense, the
difference being that the extra sentence in the first paragraph without
which - well, seems pointless:-) I suggest that you add that sentence
to the Abstract.
There are several references to 'Last Calls' and while that may be the
title of the web page about that list, it is not what I see anywhere
else. I suggest you use 'Last Call' except where a URI requires otherwise.
Tom Petch
On 19/10/2021 16:52, The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider the
following document: - 'IETF Discussion List Charter'
<draft-eggert-bcp45bis-06.txt> as Best Current Practice
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final
comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
last-call@xxxxxxxx mailing lists by 2021-11-23. Exceptionally, comments may
be sent to iesg@xxxxxxxx instead. In either case, please retain the beginning
of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
Abstract
The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) discussion mailing list
furthers the development and specification of Internet technology
through the general discussion of topics for which no dedicated
mailing lists exists. As this is the most general IETF mailing list,
considerable latitude is allowed, but there are posts and topics that
are unsuitable for this mailing list.
This document obsoletes RFC3005.
The file can be obtained via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-eggert-bcp45bis/
No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
_______________________________________________
IETF-Announce mailing list
IETF-Announce@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
.
--
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
