--On Wednesday, September 07, 2011 20:29 -0400 Scott Brim
<scott.brim@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sep 7, 2011 6:50 PM, "Thomson, Martin"
> <Martin.Thomson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>...
>> The following working group names are still open: bistro,
>> ibis, ...
>>
>> Sadly, this hasn't worked for httpbis and urnbis doesn't look
>> good.
>
> On a serious note, the unusualness of the *bis drafts implies
> that new work should be looked at separately from revisions of
> old work.
At least in a couple of the recent cases, it also implies very
focused updates to relatively mature documents with answers like
"millions of people are and think so" to questions like "who is
using this and does it work". Even then, probably not as smooth
as it should be.
I would not expect similar treatment for, e.g., a 5321bis, which
is one of the reasons it hasn't been seen lately.
> On a less serious note, it would be difficult to categorize
> anubis. :-p
:-)
john
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf