Re: IESG's Review of EMSD Specification

[braden@ISI.EDU]

  *> 
  *> The review time is not per specification, but per Internet Draft.
  *> 
  *> > The two week timeout for draft-rfced-info-banan-01.txt
  *> > expired on February 9, 1999.
  *> >
  *> >   RFC-Editor> This RFC-to-be was submitted to the RFC Editor to be 
  *> > published as
  *> >   RFC-Editor> Informational: draft-rfced-info-banan-01.txt
  *> >
  *> >   RFC-Editor> Two week timeout is initiated (9 February 1999).
  *> 
  *> The review of draft-rfced-info-banan-01.txt is almost ready, took the 
  *> two weeks, and the result of the _two_week_review_time_ will be 
  *> discussed at the IESG meeting today, thursday.
  *> 
  *>     Patrik
  *> 

Uh, oh.  There is a catch-22 here.  It is to the advantage of the
overall process that we end up publishing the best version
of the text that we can.  I spent some of my time reading and commenting
on Mohsen's 00 draft, and as a result he produced the 01 draft.  If
he had thought you would use publication of the 01 draft as a reason
to further delay action, he might not have published the 01 draft,
resulting in an RFC based on the 00 draft.

I know this has been difficult for you IESG folks, as it has for
the RFC Editor.  Can't we bring it to closure soon?

Bob Braden

  *> ------------------------------------------------------------------
  *> Area Director, Applications Area               Email: paf@swip.net
  *> IETF                                             URL: http://paf.se
  *>                                           PGP Key ID: 0xBD236602
  *> 
  *>    In theory there is no difference between theory and practice,
  *>    but in practice, there is.
  *>