S Moonesamy writes:
> Eric Rescorla pointed out yesterday that the procedures under which a
> working group operates is described in RFC 2418.
RFC 2418 does _not_ update RFC 2026, "The Internet Standards Process --
Revision 3". My question is about compliance with the standards process:
"Can the WG chairs please clarify which procedure from RFC 2026 (or from
RFCs updating RFC 2026) is being followed here?"
Here's an example of non-withdrawn email advocating standardization:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/_D1BzH4T_7RFdduZECmEXj0blqg/
Any action within IETF regarding standardization has to follow IETF's
standardization procedures. The email at the top of this thread is
certainly formal action (it's signed by "The Chairs"); I don't find the
email very clear, but it _seems_ to be calling for votes on the idea of
subsequently calling for votes on the idea of adopting a document to
consider for standardization. I don't see how IETF's standardization
procedures allow this.
The reality is that content discussion such as
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/AWdRH_-V-GxaFNLLBeWB93HjlOc/
was disrupted by this strange chair action. Why didn't the chairs simply
stay quiet regarding the signature and non-hybrid drafts, and wait to
see whether discussion resolves those controversies?
---D. J. Bernstein
_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list -- tls@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to tls-le...@ietf.org
