--On Thursday, 06 March, 2008 12:01 -0800 Ted Hardie <hardie@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 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. Hmm. If people believe that this document should be processed as a BCP, thereby presumably constraining long-term IESG behavior and adding to our procedural core, should it be added to the PUFI agenda for preliminary discussion? john _______________________________________________ IETF mailing list IETF@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf