Re: disposition of draft-ietf-http-* internet drafts
Dave Kristol (dmk@bell-labs.com)
Wed, 17 Mar 1999 10:18:05 -0500
Keith Moore wrote:
>
> > Yes and no. The applicability statement needs to be revised. But the
> > real problem IMO is that state-man-mec is caught in IESG process hell,
> > with some current IESG members unhappy with wording that was accepted by
> > former IESG members.
>
> I don't think this is an accurate description of the problem.
Fair enough. I'd really like to understand. What *is* the problem that
prevents an I-D that was last-called before July, 1998, from advancing
to RFC status or being dropped outright?
Dave Kristol