> >>> From: Hector Santos > >>> I would like to propose that new I-D submissions include > >>> information about the existence of a Working Group, if any, > >>> and/or discussion group list address, if any, for to join > >>> and participate in the development of the I-D or simply to > >>> follow it. We already have mechanisms like this in place. Most I-Ds include the relevant WG in their name, and the extremely popular XML2RFC format has a <workgroup> element for specifying the relevant WG. And the I-D submission tool checks that field. (I just got bitten by that.) The XML2RFC tool carries the <workgroup> value into the page headers of the text form (at least in some circumstances). Once one knows the WG name, one can go through www.ietf.org to find the information about the WG, including its mailing list. (Though one has to know some lore to do this successfully.) > From: John C Klensin > What we don't need, IMO, is more rules, especially rules that > would then need exception procedures, [...] Indeed, yes. Our most limited resource is the labor of the real staff and the volunteers, and we should not introduce a change that would consume their labor unless there is a significant benefit to be obtained. Dale _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf