Hello,
The new version is obviously shorter, but it omits some points. With
eliminating of DS level, RFC 5657 makes no sense more. It should be
obsoleted and moved to Historic by your document, if IESG decides to
eliminate the requirement for interoperability documentation, which I am
opposed to (see my LC comments to -06).
Another issue is STD numbers. Mentioning that they are still assigned
to ISs in Section 2.2 should be fine.
Also, Section 3.3:
(2) At any time after two years from the approval of this document as
a BCP, the IESG may choose to reclassify any Draft Standard
document as Proposed Standard.
Won't such action be allowed after 2 years from approval?
Mykyta Yevstifeyev
28.07.2011 5:02, The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider
the following document:
- 'Reducing the Standards Track to Two Maturity Levels'
<draft-housley-two-maturity-levels-08.txt> as a BCP
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf