Skip to main content

Reclassification of RFC 1863 to Historic
draft-ietf-idr-rfc1863-historic-00

No Objection

(Bert Wijnen)
(Bill Fenner)
(Mark Townsley)
(Russ Housley)

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 00 and is now closed.

Allison Mankin Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (2005-04-24) Unknown
My understanding of the old-standards process is that the IESG will pass
something like this for the group of documents when that process gives
its output to us - and within that group, some of the documents will
need to have specific notations in the published document.  I do not
see why there should be forbearance from publishing this one.  I believe
there should be a permanent record of documents going to Historic;
it need not be per document like this one.

(And where is the old-standards process?  What's the snag?)
Bert Wijnen Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Bill Fenner Former IESG member
(was Discuss, Yes) No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Brian Carpenter Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (2005-04-21) Unknown
Newtrk isn't looking at Informationals. I think we should continue at normal course and speed.
David Kessens Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (2005-04-25) Unknown
I agree with Bill's DISCUSS. No need to record an additional DISCUSS.
Mark Townsley Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Russ Housley Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Scott Hollenbeck Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (2005-04-20) Unknown
I can understand where Tony is coming from, but I think there's value in having a record of the decision to reclassify an RFC.  Is some other means of recording such decisions being considered?
Ted Hardie Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (2005-04-22) Unknown
If NEWTRK has a suggested procedure for this, then I think we could
adopt that procedure in the interim and use it instead of RFC
publication.  But I think we need some formal adoption before
we switch (either publication of an RFC, minuted agreement to a
publishable procedure, or whatever).  In the mean time, I think
we should take these as they come.