> On Apr 10, 2020, at 12:11 PM, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Regarding one point therein: >> >> When a document coming from an individual submitter makes an IANA >> request that specifies registrant information, "IETF" is to be used, >> as these registrations also come from the IETF as a whole via IETF >> last call consensus. >> >> >> Until a document is adopted by a WG, this is inappropriate and incorrect. The assignee and point of contact >> should never be the IETF until a doc is adopted. > > Are you saying that you think an individual submission that is being > sponsored by an AD in the IETF stream... is not a product of the IETF > because it didn't come from a working group?’ No, but that’s not clear from the text. I think it’d be fine for the text to just be more clear that this is “individual submission sponsored by an AD”. > Documents in the Independent stream are, of course, different, and > this document doesn't apply to them. Understood; it’s just that the current text is vague and easy to misapply out of context. Joe
