Hiya, On 11/09/2019 09:50, S Moonesamy wrote: > Hi Brian, > At 01:38 PM 10-09-2019, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >> Do we really need to worry about that? This is a time of change and I >> don't think it matters if we deviate from the letter of a 7-year-old >> Informational document. > > The document is an IAB RFC. It discusses about a version of the RFC > Editor Model, as viewed in 2012. What is the purpose of the IAB members > (listed in Section 7) approving what was written on that topic if nobody > worries about what is written in the document? I think a lot of people are worrying about what is stated in 6635 at the moment:-) That includes the current IAB who are supportive of RSOC in how they've trying to keep RFCs rolling whilst the community figure out what to do about possible changes to 6635. See Ted's mail on that. [1] Personally, I figure that means that RSOC need to be allowed some latitude here and we ought not insist on this SOW following every single line of 6635. I also hope we resist the temptation to try make the SOW a proxy for the discussion about what to do about 6635. I don't see how any of us would really benefit if we tried that - the bigger discussion will have to happen in any case. Cheers, S. [1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/M2d85XpOOR4tm78yGyh205iJWJc > > Regards, > S. Moonesamy >
Attachment:
0x5AB2FAF17B172BEA.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
