Sam Hartman wrote:
My strong preference as an individual is to approve this document as is. I think there's a good split between RFC 3967 and this document. RFC 3967 will cover informational documents; this document will cover standards track. I'm not in principle opposed to having one document but I am opposed to the delay it would introduce.
It's not just one more document. We're working on at least a dozen, starting with RFC 2026, going on to various "IOPs", the boiler plate documents, IESG sponsorship documents, IRTF rules, and more. One has to be an Internet lawyer to understand the system.
Eliot _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf