On 04/09/2013 11:20, Spencer Dawkins wrote: > On 9/3/2013 6:02 PM, Pete Resnick wrote: >> On 9/3/13 3:17 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >>> <rant class="short">So that the reader of RFC 2026 will need to read yet >>> another document to get the full picture? There are currently 8 RFCs >>> that >>> update RFC 2026, some of which have been updated themselves.</rant> >>> >>> Quite seriously - I appreciate Pete's reluctance to overload the >>> draft, but >>> it is a related topic. I'd be inclined to include it. >> >> OK, does this do anything for anyone? >> >> Finally, RFC 2026 [RFC2026] section 6.1.3 also calls for the >> publication of an "official summary of standards actions completed >> and pending" in the Internet Society's newsletter. This has also not >> been done in recent years, and the "publication of record" for >> standards actions has for some time been the minutes of the IESG. >> [IESG-MINUTES] Therefore, that paragraph is also effectively removed >> from section 6.1.3. > > That would work for me. > > Spencer Me too. Brian