At 9:16 AM -0700 9/2/08, Bob Braden wrote: >An aside: The purpose of AUTH48 state is not (should not be) to resolve >even minor issues. Ideally, no issues should arise in AUTH48, but the >world is not a perfect place. But let's not get in the habit of sweeping >minor changes to the every end of the publication process. The revision >process is pretty cheap. A big +1 to that. It is becoming increasingly common to hear reviewers and ADs say "please fix that in AUTH48" instead of "please turn in a new draft with these small number of changes". Because tools.ietf.org makes reading Internet Draft diffs so easy, there is really no good reason to not have the input to the RFC Editor be a known-clean document. --Paul Hoffman, Director --VPN Consortium _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf