The call for comments on IONs seems to have ended without clarifying the effect of the end of the experiment on the standing of current IONs. For most of them, I honestly don't think the standing is much of an issue. But for the "discuss criteria" ION, I believe it is a serious issue. At this point, it is difficult to know whether the discuss criteria document is in force or not, and the extent to which the issuing body is bound by it. I think this is a very bad thing. I call on Russ to restore this document to its original status as an Internet Draft and to process it as a BCP. IESG DISCUSSes are a very serious part of our process at this point. Having a community agreed standard to which IESG members could be held was always a better path than than a document approved only by the IESG. Now that the ION experiment is over and the status of its document is in limbo, things are even worse. The current document is here: http://www.ietf.org/IESG/content/ions/ion-discuss-criteria.html for those readers playing the home game. Ted Hardie _______________________________________________ IETF mailing list IETF@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf