|
|
|
Greg Newby: 05/03/2011 12:31 PM EDT
|
| |
Action: |
Move
Moved from Submit OGF Draft to Not Published
Category changed from Informational to none (no value)
Group changed from GFSG to none (no value)
Status changed from Author Action Needed to Closed
|
|
|
Greg Newby: 05/03/2011 12:31 PM EDT
|
| |
Comment: |
Update from May 3 standards telecon: it sounds like this is being pursued via IETF, and not slated for OGF publication.
We'll plan on removing this from the OGF tracker. If there is a need/desire to go ahead with the OGF process, perhaps with an updated document, we
can re-open the process.
|
| |
Action: |
Update
|
|
|
Greg Newby: 03/19/2011 11:07 PM EDT
|
| |
Comment: |
We'll discuss this at OGF31 It is not clear whether this will go through the OGF publication process or not. If it is intended for OGF publication,
the next step will be 30-day public comment.
|
| |
Action: |
Update
|
|
|
Greg Newby: 01/24/2011 12:19 PM EST
|
| |
Comment: |
The standards council was reminded of this pending issue.
|
| |
Action: |
Update
|
|
|
Greg Newby: 12/13/2010 12:44 PM EST
|
| |
Comment: |
Notes from the November 29 standards council telecon:
"This is the URN namespace document. Suggestions for alteration to the text regarding non-normative examples were accepted by the author. As I
recall, the conclusion after discussion was to ask for publication as an OGF informational
document (GFD-I). This was to be communicated back to Freek by Richard with a request to start this submission process."
|
| |
Action: |
Update
Status changed from GFSG Review: Initial to Author Action Needed
|
|
|
Freek Dijkstra: 12/06/2010 8:52 AM EST
|
| |
Comment: |
Created a new version:
* Textual clarifications (on examples and rfc2141bis compatibility)
* topic identifier MUST be described in GFD
* Changed email address to urn@ogf.org
bumped to version -01 and submitted to IETF:
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-dijkstra-urn-ogf-01.txt
|
| |
Action: |
Update
|
|
|
|
|
Freek Dijkstra: 11/22/2010 11:35 AM EST
|
| |
Comment: |
For the OGF, I only seek standards council review, since it will not be published as OGF document.
For the record, within the IETF, it will go through 30-day period review, and I do appreciate it if you can leave this artifact open till that period
has passed.
|
| |
Action: |
Update
|
|
|
Greg Newby: 11/22/2010 11:27 AM EST
|
| |
Comment: |
The standards council discussed this briefly on November 22, and will schedule it for review on November 29. Sent to the submitter:
Freek,
Would you please clarify whether you want ONLY the standards
council review (i.e., some brief feedback from the members)?
Or, would you like a public comment period? If so,
30-day (information/experimentation) or 60-day (recommendation)?
My understanding is that you're not seeking for the OGF to
actually publish this. Thanks for clarification.
|
| |
Action: |
Update
|
|
|
Greg Newby: 11/15/2010 7:17 PM EST
|
| |
Comment: |
Forwarding to the standards council for review. We will discuss is around November 29 or soon afterwards.
|
| |
Action: |
Update
Assigned To changed from Greg Newby to Richard Hughes-Jones
|
|
|
Freek Dijkstra: 11/13/2010 4:26 PM EST
|
| |
Comment: |
This Internet Draft delegates the urn:ogf hierarchy (part of the general urn namespace) to the OGF.
This is one of two documents required. This document is publish by the IETF, while a second document is to be published by the OGF which describes the
procedure for subdelegation within this namespace.
Feedback is kindly appreciated.
|
| |
Action: |
Update
|
|
|
|
