-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Thomas Narten wrote: >>Well, there are always going to be judgement calls about whether something >>is or isn't an end-run, which is where I would expect "discuss" >>positions to come from on such documents. > > > Process-wise, this isn't right, IMO (which is where I suspect John is > coming from). Process-wise, the thing to do is respond to the RFC > editor with one of response 4 or 5 in Section 3 of RFC 3932 (e.g., > potential end run, this needs to be reviewed by the IETF', to make it > clear exactly what state the document is. > > The decision of whether something is an "end run" should be relatively > fast. One can always air on the conservative side if in doubt and say > "looks like end run", while getting more detailed reviews. If in doubt, it's more productive say "MIGHT be an end run" and ask for more time. Throwing tar isn't a substitute for hesitating before throwing. Joe -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFCilFvE5f5cImnZrsRAnakAJ9X5nraEdwdyUDfDdvR6il0ot5AwACgvB8p 3TCLVLLuiyg16aJ9y5xs9yI= =vSBT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf