Pasi.Eronen@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > Olaf Kolkman rote: > >> Personally I would like to see that whatever document enters into >> the RFC-Production function (to use the terminology from the RFC >> Editor model[*]) has a clean copy in the repository. That allows for >> a very clean interface between the streams and the RFC-producer. So, >> I would argue that the result of (iv) is always posted. > > Based on my (quite short) experience as AD so far, it seems document > authors vary greatly in how fast they can update the document and > submit it (once the text has been agreed). > > I've seen this done in less than 10 minutes (sometimes before the > IESG telechat ended). I've seen cases where it has taken several > months. In cases where the time is measured in weeks (relatively > common) or months (fortunately rare), just sending the RFC Editor > note (and not waiting for updated clean copy) saves time, especially > considering that the RFC Editor processes documents quite fast > nowadays. > ... I'm tempted to say that if it takes the authors months to update the document with the suggested change, then, well, a publication delay of several months is what they deserve :-). BR, Julian _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf