Subject: Re: No active 2445 author is a big problem

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 15:13:20 -0400

Actually, there are RFC's where the authors are dead and there is no 
working group around.  What happens usually in that case is an "interested 
party" makes changes to the RFC, submits it as a new draft and the IETF 
decides to either pass it to a working group or form one. 

And yes, there are changes that need to be made to the existing RFC's. 
There are several that have come out of interop testing and probably a few 
more that will come out of the next one that should happen in a few 
months.  What's missing right now is a volunteer for editor.  Any one can 
be an editor - what will happen is we need to resubmit the three RFCs - 
2445, 2446 and 2447 - with their changes, for last call to the IETF.  They 
will then get new RFC numbers and will say internally that the drafts 
supercede 2445, 2446, and 2447.  I can probably put together a list (with 
some volunteers help) on what needs to be changed - then, if people tell 
me exact wording, I'm even willing to be the editor.  But I am not a 
calendaring vendor or programmer.  I sort of know what's going on by 
osmosis now - I am, and have always been, a user who happens to run this 
group.  Bruce Kahn is our Methods Reviewer - he is not an author nor is he 
an editor - nor can he be one, based on business requirements and 
responsibilities.  He can, however, review what is submitted as 
replacement drafts. 

I think if we can get a group of three-four people, interested in fixing 
these drafts, we can get them done relatively quickly. 

Volunteers?  Anyone willing to gamble on me being the editor - you 
basically tell me what to say and I'll put it in.  I'll post the text here 
on the list - and you guys can shoot at the target for all your worth. 
Cool?

Mark Swanson <[email-masked]>
Sent by: [email-masked]
08/05/2003 14:08

        To:     "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
        cc: 
        Subject:        No active 2445 author is a big problem

Hello,

Perhaps I don't understand the process well enough, but...

I'm surprised that the IETF would let a document on the standards track 
exist
without at least one participating author (or someone with a 
maintainership
role). It would seem that an author/maintainer could rule on 2445
inconsistencies, 2445 would be fixed, and people could move on.

Over the years some major problems have been identified with 2445 yet no 
new
document with the proposed fixes has emerged - even when unanimous 
acceptance
(with zero dissent) occurs wrt the proposed fix.

I'm hoping I am misunderstanding something because it would seem this 
issue
will prevent 2445 from ever becoming a standard.

Thanks.

--
Schedule your world with ScheduleWorld.com
http://www.ScheduleWorld.com/
Java Web start (JNLP):
http://www.ScheduleWorld.com/sw/ScheduleWorld.jnlp