Subject: RE: draft-ietf-idr-bgp4-18.txt

From: "Gray, Eric" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2002 09:35:48 -0500

Bill,

	My mistake.  Apparently, some working group
chairs have directly interceded in the past, since
it has been the case at least a few times, that a
draft has passed WG last call and taken more than
18 months to progress to the next step.

	If it is not the policy of the Secretariat 
(or their designate) to check with WG chairs, it
should be.  By definition, once a draft has been
accepted by the WG, it belongs to the WG.  Why
should it be subject to expiry as a result of an 
author or editor being unable to rev' it?

Eric W. Gray
Systems Architect
Celox Networks, Inc.
[email-masked]
508 305 7214

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill Fenner [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 6:53 PM
> To: [email-masked]
> Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked];
> [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> Subject: RE: draft-ietf-idr-bgp4-18.txt
> 
> 
> >	My understanding has been that the ID administrator
> >would not normally remove expired working group drafts
> >(such as this one) without explicit agreement from a WG
> >chair.
> 
> I've never head of that.  -17 was submitted in January (at least, the
> timestamp on my copy is January 8) and its footers say that it expired
> in July 2002.  It also said, in the boilerplate that we all ignore,
> 
>    Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
>    and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
>    time
> 
> So, it's been more than 6 months, -17 was expired.  In my 7 years as a
> WG chair I don't think that the secretariat has ever checked with me
> before removing a WG draft that had expired.
> 
>   Bill