> Thanks for resurrecting this document. It's been a while and IIRC the document > was somewhere in the IESG process post IETF last call. You seem to have made > some pretty substantial changes: I wonder if you could post a summary. That'd be really difficult at this point, though one way you can discern what I've done is to look at the old IESG ballot. I addressed pretty much all the comments there, save a few that I disagreed with. And there is, of course, the diff tool, which should mostly help. > wonder whether the Shepherding AD could let us know whether this will come back > for a further IETF last call (I can relax and read it later) or plans to go for > approval with only IESG sign-off (I need to read it urgently and scream if there > are issues). I've also asked Terry, who is now the sponsoring AD, to decide whether a new IETF last call is needed. It will certainly need a fresh IESG ballot and a new telechat appearance at the least. Whether the changes are substantive enough to need a new last call is something that I, myself, am of two minds on. > FWIW, I noticed that section 1.2 now has some text in double square brackets > that seeks to (temporarily?) describe what material should go on the first > version of https://iana.org/help/protocol-registration. Can I suggest that you > make the RFC-to-be stable and future-proof by converting this to a description > of a minimal subset of information that should be on the web page in the first > and all subsequent versions (i.e., information that should be on the page, > period) and then you can remove the brackets. Indeed; that is the intent. I wanted to get the text out for review and further processing while I work with Michelle on getting the initial page populated and posted. Barry