Subject: Renaming RFC

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 22:55:34 +0100

RFC should be renamed to Resulted From Comments. It's now the endpoint of the process; Request For Comments dated from when it was the start.

(Though RFCs through workgroups are arguably Resulted from Collaboration/Consensus/Chairing).

If you're going to alter the process in any way, start here.

Lloyd Wood
http://sat-net.com/L.Wood/

---

From: t.p. <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 10:30:25 +0100

----- Original Message -----
From: <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 10:55 PM
Subject: Renaming RFC

RFC should be renamed to Resulted From Comments. It's now the endpoint
of the process; Request For Comments dated from when it was the start.

<tp>

Fundamentally disagree.

Some SDOs produce standards as tablets of stone, and the world at large
is not even allowed to read them.

The IETF says this is the best we can do, can you help us make it
better, by making a request for comments.  For me, this is the reason
why the IETF succeeds, because it looks to engage the whole world, to do
yet better.

Tom Petch

</tp>

(Though RFCs through workgroups are arguably Resulted from
Collaboration/Consensus/Chairing).

Lloyd Wood

---

From: Richard Barnes <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 10:06:50 -0400

Cf. <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5513>

---

From: Russ Housley <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 12:04:36 -0400

I think this suggestion should be discussed on rfc-interest, not this mail list.

Russ