Good afternoon Sarah!

If all things are equal and nothing needed to be changed with the current text, 
of these two options:

> There are two possible approaches:
>     • Replace RFC 3683 in BCP83 with this document; or
>     • Obsolete BCP83 entirely and assign a new number.

I have a weak preference for obsoleting bcp83 and assigning a new number to 
create a clear break.

Please give Lars (as the other author) and MODPOD chairs 24 hours to weigh in.  
If nothing is heard, let's proceed with the new bcp number.

Thanks,
Roman

-----Original Message-----
From: Sarah Tarrant <[email protected]> 
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2026 12:45 PM
To: Roman Danyliw <[email protected]>
Cc: Sandy Ginoza <[email protected]>; Lars Eggert <[email protected]>; 
[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; RFC 
Editor <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Eliot Lear 
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [AD] Document intake questions about 
<draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes-16>

Warning: External Sender - do not click links or open attachments unless you 
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.


Hi Roman,

Just a friendly reminder that we await your feedback on this draft's BCP 
status. Please see email thread for full conversation.

Sincerely,
Sarah Tarrant
RFC Production Center

> On Feb 12, 2026, at 7:00 AM, Eliot Lear <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Sandy,
> On 11.02.2026 22:38, Sandy Ginoza wrote:
>> Hi again,
>>
>> Just a bit of additional information, as this document updates the following 
>> RFCs which are part of 3 different BCPs:
>>
>> Obsoletes RFC 3683, BCP 83: A Practice for Revoking Posting Rights to 
>> IETF Mailing Lists Obsoletes RFC 3934, BCP 25: Updates to RFC 2418 
>> Regarding the Management of IETF Mailing Lists Updates RFC 2418, BCP 
>> 25: IETF Working Group Guidelines and Procedures Updates RFC 9245, 
>> BCP 45: IETF Discussion List Charter
>>
>> Please review and let us know if adding draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes to 
>> BCP 83 makes the most sense.
> There are two possible approaches:
>     • Replace RFC 3683 in BCP83 with this document; or
>     • Obsolete BCP83 entirely and assign a new number.
> I have no strong preference either way.
> Eliot
> <OpenPGP_0x87B66B46D9D27A33.asc>

-- 
auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to