Re: ESRO ID

• To: Scott Bradner <sob@harvard.edu>
• Subject: Re: ESRO ID
• From: Mohsen Banan <mohsen@neda.com>
• Date: Fri, 8 Aug 1997 11:53:13 -0700 (PDT)
• Cc: iesg-secretary@ietf.org, JBCheng@attws-hq1.nwest.attws.com, mtaylor@teledesic.com, pean@neda.com, allyn@eng.sun.com, Mohsen Banan-neda <mohsen@neda.com>
• Content-Length: -874
• Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
• In-Reply-To: <199708071943.PAA11036@newdev.harvard.edu>
• References: <199708071943.PAA11036@newdev.harvard.edu>

>>>>> On Thu, 7 Aug 1997 15:43:37 -0400 (EDT), Scott Bradner <sob@harvard.edu> said:

  Scott> I have exchanged mail with the ex transport co-AD about this ID.  She feels
  Scott> that this ID represents a significant technical contribution and feels that
  Scott> it should be advanced on the IETF standards track.

Thanks for overseeing the progress of this towards publication.
 
  Scott> The normal way to do that with a non-working group document is to issue
  Scott> a 4 week last-call to the general IETF community announcing the intention
  Scott> of the IESG to evaluate the ID as a Proposed Standard and asking for 
  Scott> comments.  After the end of that last-call period the IESG would
  Scott> evaluate the responses and proceed.

  Scott> If this is valuable technology then it would be a shame to miss
  Scott> the chance to get it on the standards track by a quick publication as 
  Scott> an informational RFC (yes we could publish it as an info then do the
  Scott> last call but that would be unusual and potentially confusing later
  Scott> on when the RFC is referred to)

  Scott> So - I'd like the authors of the ID to let me know how you would like
  Scott> to proceed.  I'm quite willing to be the IESG shepard for the ID if
  Scott> you are interested in proceeding to a last call.

I have spoken with the other two authors (Mark Taylor and Jia-Bing
Cheng) and we have a consensus amongst us that at this time we should
go ahead with the immediate publication of ESRO ID as an Informational
RFC.

The urgency for publication in this case outweighs our interest in
getting this document on the standards track.

However, I am very interested in getting the next version of ESRO on
the standards track.  In addition, we also have been working on
another protocol that uses ESRO which I believe represents enough of a
technical contribution to merit being put on the standards track as
well. I am hoping to have them ready for submission as RFCs-to-be by
the end of next month.

Again, thank you for all your help with this.

...Mohsen.

Replies

ESRO ID, Scott Bradner

ESRO ID, Scott Bradner

• Prev by Date: Now: Improving the Informational RFCs Publication Process both in Theory and in Practice -- Was: Re:Unexpected and Unreasonable delays in processing of Informational
• Next by Date: Re: ESRO ID
• Prev by thread: ESRO ID
• Next by thread: Re: ESRO ID
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread