Henning Schulzrinne wrote: > Summary of suggestions: > > - Official statement of encouragement from the IESG that WG drafts > submitted for IESG action SHOULD be in XML-RFC format when being > submitted (but can be in any format the working group feels like and the > I-D editor accepts during the early stages). > > - Allow submission of XML-RFC format to the I-D editor, as part of the > automation of that part of our process. > > - (Semi-serious) Have an earlier IETF cut-off date for I-Ds in ASCII, > since it takes longer to automatically check them for compliance. This > will solve our format problem in one IETF round :-) I love it! > - Making XML-RFC versions of existing or new RFCs available to the public. absolutely! The RFC Editors actually have source versions of most existing RFCs, either as nroff or xml. They're just not easily accessible; you have to ask to get a specific copy. I've always been surprised that they haven't been accessible right next to the .txt files. Tony Hansen tony@xxxxxxx _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf