Subject: [newtrk] Could we maybe discuss the drafts?

From: "Spencer Dawkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2004 14:21:17 -0600

I don't mean to be snotty (it's too close to Valentine's Day), but -

As of today, the WGS proposed in draft-dawkins-pstmt-twostage is NOT
an archival document. It reuses the Internet Draft mechanism and is
exactly as ephemeral as any other Internet Draft.

IIRC, Bradner's draft proposed a Stable Snap Shot (SSS), with similar
mechanics.

I know of no submitted draft that proposed making these documents
archival.

People with other opinions are welcome to sent text. There remains no
admission control over Internet Draft submission, except for what
appears to be flaky DNS the weekend of the I-D 00 cutoff.

I sent in a list of people who I expected to benefit from WGS as
written in a draft. I was hoping for feedback on that list.

FYI, none of the five drafts submitted before Minneapolis NEWTRK have
been updated, and none of them have been discussed on this list. We
have had edifying discussions about charters and the upcoming meeting.

The problem(?) that Internet Drafts do NOT disappear from the face of
the Internet remains, but is not relevant to the question of WGS. If
it was, we would have an even bigger problem when we issue nine
versions of a specification, NONE reflecting a consensus call, and ALL
of which are still on http://www.watersprings.org/pub/id.

Thank you for your attention.

Spencer

.
newtrk resources:_____________________________________________________
web user interface: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk.html
mhonarc archive: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk/index.html