Adrian, Four of eight links in the message you referred to are dead. I'm looking for ion-ad-sponsoring, but there is neither such ION nor IESG statement, as mentioned there. Where should I find it? Mykyta 06.03.2011 13:52, Adrian Farrel wrote: John, I (personally and not daring to speak for the IESG) consider that an RFC updating 4693 to report on the experiment and the consequent acts is a fine idea. Basically taking the text from the email I referenced, but being a bit careful with URLs. Cheers, Adrian-----Original Message----- From: John C Klensin [mailto:john-ietf@xxxxxxx] Sent: 06 March 2011 10:32 To: adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxx; 'Mykyta Yevstifeyev'; 'IETF Discussion' Subject: RE: Where to find IONs? --On Sunday, March 06, 2011 11:15 +0000 Adrian Farrel <adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Hi Mykyta, Please see http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-announce/current/msg 04792.html AdrianAdrian, With the understanding that this is a different question than Mykyta's, how is someone new to the IETF or trying to understand our procedures or procedural documentation supposed to find that out. The usual searches mostly tell me about the ION WG, not these documents. Wouldn't it be reasonable to publish a short RFC that updates RFC 4693 into oblivion, says at least that IONs are dead and maybe explains briefly why it wasn't a good idea. If the IESG doesn't have enough spare cycles to give that priority, I assume that, since Mykyta is asking and given the energy he has been putting into other things, if some AD gave him a quick explanation, a little encouragement, and a promise to process such a document, it might appear fairly quickly. john |
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf