Alessandro You could, of course, issue an updated version which simply says that its predecessor should not have been filed for the reasons you give in the e-mail. No need to include any other text whatsoever (except, of course, the relevant boiler plate). That seems simpler to me than asking the system to do something rather unusual that it may not have a mechanism to do. In future, there could always be another version moving the process forward in the appropriate direction. Tom Petch ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alessandro Vesely" <vesely@xxxxxxx> To: <ietf-action@xxxxxxxx> Cc: "Zoltan Ordogh" <zordogh@xxxxxxx>; "apps discuss" <apps-discuss@xxxxxxxx>; "ietf" <ietf@xxxxxxxx> Sent: Friday, January 20, 2012 4:03 PM Subject: Please remove draft-ordogh-spam-reporting-using-imap-kleansed fromI-D repository > Dear IETF Secretariat, > > I hereby ask that draft-ordogh-spam-reporting-using-imap-kleansed be > removed from the I-D repository. I submitted it on 10 Jan 2012, in a > clumsy attempt to speed up a discussion about a similarly named I-D, > draft-ordogh-spam-reporting-using-imap. The editing I carried out was > based on previous writing about, both privately and on IETF lists. > However, I hadn't obtained the author's permission to alter the > boilerplate-type of the original document. Thus, the document I > posted bears "wrong" copyright information. In particular, unwitting > editors may derive their own work from this document if they just > abide by its boilerplate text, while the original post did not imply a > handoff of change control. > > I apologize for any inconveniences that my action might have caused. > > Regards > Alessandro Vesely > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > > _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf