On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 04:05:07PM -0400, Russ Housley wrote: > Ben: > > >>>> Why are we having a second Last Call on this document? > >>>> > >>>> The first Last Call began on 16 Feb 2018 and ended on 16 Mar 2018. > >>> > >>> II[UR]C, the process for moving things to historic requires a > >>> separate status-change document that goes out for 4-week IETF LC > >>> alongside the document effecting the status change. I don't think > >>> the status-change document existed in last month's last call. > >> > >> Indeed it did. I do not know whether the Last Call properly included it, bu the history tab clearly shows that the status change document was created on 10 Feb 2018. > >> > >> See https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/status-change-suiteb-to-historic/history/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/status-change-suiteb-to-historic/history/> > > > > I was just looking at > > https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-announce/current/maillist.html, > > which does *not* show an IETF Last Call being issued for > > "Reclassification of Suite B Documents to Historic Status" (the > > status change document) until today. So that seems to be the part > > that was missed last time. > > I do not believe that the additional month will yield any new information. I don't believe that anyone thinks it will. But, until the IESG decides to revise https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/designating-rfcs-as-historic.html it is the process we are stuck with. (And given the document load for the next couple telechats, I don't expect the IESG to get around to deciding to revise this statement before the four week LC is up...) -Ben
