-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
[ Note, I'm replying from my personal address because that's how I'm subscribed to the list for hysterical raisins. ]
Bruce Lilly wrote:
| The issue is not the appearance of registrations prior to final | publication of an RFC, but rather the usability of the references in the | registry.
Thank you for clarifying, and thank you for raising this issue.
| I have heard that there is a plan to use the IETF Secretariat's I-D | Database lookup feature to improve those references; that sounds like an | improvement.
I'm not sure what solution you're referring to here. What I can say (as I announced last night at the plenary) is that after discussing this issue with Michelle what we decided was that she would change the link in the anchor tag to point to the current version of the draft until the RFC editor publishes the new RFC. We're hoping that this will increase the utility of the link to those interested in learning about the new document, and reduce any lingering ambiguity over the meaning of the RFC-<draft name> reference.
We are of course still open to suggestions on how IANA can improve its service to the community, feel free to send them along.
Regards,
Doug (aka doug.barton@xxxxxxxxx)
- -- ~ If you're never wrong, you're not trying hard enough -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32)
iD8DBQFCMQbzyIakK9Wy8PsRAjmNAJ9n3BDObFkDaudy7IqEQPgpLLPSgQCfTiFR 80ADG6Aoys6Cf58hQo8s7zw= =6s6H -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf