Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Furthermore, I support Loa's proposal to add the "Non-expiring" status that
> can be assigned to a WG draft based on WG consensus (it can be removed at a
> later time) to save from the necessity of technical refreshes.
+1
It also seems like this is a tools request, and does not require any change
to our process. We'd simply have that category "(Non-expiring) Reference Material"
which would be above "Expired Drafts", and would essentially be almost the
same.
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@xxxxxxxxxxxx> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
