Spencer, This was raised in the Problem WG, where I pointed out that all I-Ds are *not* equal - even though the current credo says that they are. Over the years, there has been an implicit status associated with *WG* drafts, which has not been associated with *individual* drafts. AFAIK this point hasn't been picked up. Until the implicit assumptions are explicitly codified, or rejected, there will be continuing confusion about the status of I-Ds. When additional rules, e.g. submission rules, are formulated around the implicit notion of I-D status, the problems are compounded. Regards, Graham Travers International Standards Manager BT Group e-mail: graham.travers@xxxxxx tel: +44(0) 1359 235086 mobile: +44(0) 7917 02016 HWB279, PO Box 200,London, N18 1ZF, UK BT Group plc Registered office: 81 Newgate Street London EC1A 7AJ Registered in England and Wales no. 4190816 This electronic message contains information from BT Group plc which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. If you have received this electronic message in error, please notify us by telephone or email (to the numbers or address above) immediately. Activity and use of the BT Group plc E-mail system is monitored to secure its effective operation and for other lawful business purposes. Communications using this system will also be monitored and may be recorded to secure effective operation and for other lawful business purposes. -----Original Message----- From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Spencer Dawkins Sent: 25 February 2005 07:38 To: ietf@xxxxxxxx Subject: Re: MARID back from the grave? ... "it's just a name" - and it's not like working groups are (or that working groups should be) consistent in when they adopt a draft as a working group draft. I see this as a bigger problem - some working groups that have more work in individual drafts than in working group drafts, because they wait until they have substantial consensus around drafts before even adopting them, while other working groups create initial text as working group drafts and then start wordsmithing from there - but haven't found anyone else that was interested in formalizing what it means when working groups adopt a draft. My particular interest was as part of ICAR - I was thinking that there's a blizzard of individual drafts, but if something is adopted as a working group draft, it starts to absorb working group and AD time (at a minumum), so this transition point might be a good opportunity for a formal review. But ICAR won't be worrying about this topic anytime in the foreseeable future :-) Spencer _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf