see Loa’s note - might want too clean the data before relying on it a quick check shows that RFCs 3856-3858 were from the simple WG RFC 3595 looks like art was the opsawg did not check the rest but I doubt the LDAP RFCs were IS Scott > On Jul 16, 2018, at 5:19 PM, Gonzalo Camarillo <Gonzalo.Camarillo@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Brian, > > thanks for the clarification! The slide talks about PS, not DS. I guess > that is what you meant, right? > > Anyway, the database shows a bunch of RFCs from the Independent Stream > that are Standards Track or BCP, respectively: > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/search/rfc_search_detail.php?pubstatus%5B%5D=Standards+Track&std_trk=Any&pub_date_type=any&stream_name=Independent > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/search/rfc_search_detail.php?std_trk=Any&pubstatus%5B%5D=Best+Current+Practice&pub_date_type=any&stream_name=Independent > > Cheers, > > Gonzalo > > On 16/07/2018 5:09 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >> Well, I very much doubt that the Independent strem has published a DS and a BCP since the stream was formally defined. Can you clarify? >> >> Regards >> Brian >> >> On 17/07/2018 08:40, Gonzalo Camarillo wrote: >>> Hi Brian, >>> >>> if you are not more concrete with your comments, it will be difficult >>> for us to address them ;-) Please, note that slide 9 lists what has been >>> done while slide 10 lists what it is allowed. So, for example, those >>> slides show that while the Independent Stream is not supposed to publish >>> Proposed Standards, it was somehow done in the past. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Gonzalo >>> >>> On 16/07/2018 4:29 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >>>> slide 9, Independent column, there are 2 erroneous X's >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> Brian >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 17/07/2018 07:09, Gonzalo Camarillo wrote: >>>>> Hi Loa, >>>>> >>>>> the chair slides are available at (in her email, Heather also sent links >>>>> to the mailing list archives and to the original BoF proposal): >>>>> >>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/materials/slides-102-rfcplusplus-slides-00 >>>>> >>>>> You can find the questions there. As you can see, they are a few very >>>>> generic questions intended to explore the problem space because, so far, >>>>> the discussions on the mailing list have not converged at all. We have >>>>> not seen any consensus so far around whether or not there is a problem >>>>> and, if so, whether or not it is a problem worth solving. >>>>> >>>>> There have been discussions about the solution space as well, but we >>>>> believe we need to discuss the problem space a bit better before jumping >>>>> into designing and discussing concrete solutions. >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> >>>>> Gonzalo >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 16/07/2018 1:57 PM, Loa Andersson wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Folks, >>>>>> >>>>>> With an agenda like this >>>>>> >>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/materials/agenda-102-rfcplusplus-00 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> How am I supposed to prepared the the bof? >>>>>> >>>>>> /Loa >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >
