... and I promise I'll read the thread all the way to the end next time.
Yes, this is exactly the question I was asking. Thanks to Russ and Jari for
both answers.
Spencer
I think Spencer is asking the diff between the older version
of this ION (when it was still a draft), and the approved ION.
I do not believe there were any substantive changes. This
has been operational practice for some time, and
has now been published officially as an ION.
Jari
Russ Housley kirjoitti:
Spencer:
This document is intended to set expectations. It does not make any
normative changes to RFC 2026.
Russ
At 01:08 PM 8/27/2007, Spencer Dawkins wrote:
Hi, Russ,
A quick comparison with version 02 of this draft (from 2006,
currently listed in DEAD state) is showing minor typo corrections and
a million format changes, but the criteria haven't changed in any
meaningful way. Is this your understanding also?
Thanks,
Spencer
----- Original Message ----- From: "IETF Chair" <chair@xxxxxxxx>
To: "IETF Announcement list" <ietf-announce@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 9:53 AM
Subject: ION Announcement: DISCUSS Criteria in IESG Review
A new IETF Operational Note (ION) is now available in online:
Name: ion-discuss-criteria
Title: DISCUSS Criteria in IESG Review
URL: http://www.ietf.org/IESG/content/ions/ion-discuss-criteria.html
This ION was approved by the IESG on July 5, 2007.
This document describes the role of the 'DISCUSS' position in the IESG
review process. It gives some guidance on when a DISCUSS should and
should not be issued. It also discusses procedures for DISCUSS
resolution.
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf