Ack; will fix, Joe, and thanks for letting me know that it's not clear. Barry On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 3:43 PM Joseph Touch <touch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > 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
