RE: Fw: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-urlreg-noreg-00.txt

I understand but we can't have a situation where a small unelected largely
unaccountable group of people unilaterally decide what is and is not
allowable. It violates the entire IETF process. There must be an appeal
process. I think the "appeal" process should be the existence of a permanent
mailing list. Anyone who is interested in URIs can join that mailing list.
If the advisory panel decides to reject a URI then a notice will be posted
to the mailing list and those who are interested can discuss it.

	Yaron

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Larry Masinter [SMTP:[email protected]]
> Sent:	Tuesday, November 18, 1997 10:42 PM
> To:	Yaron Goland
> Cc:	Ian King; [email protected]; Rich Petke
> Subject:	Re: Fw: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-urlreg-noreg-00.txt
> 
> There are no standing working groups. (I know HTTP has seemed that
> way, but we're going to close up shop soon, I hope). The URL
> registration mechanism has to outlive any working group.
> 
> So there's no group to send to. That's the whole point: what's a process
> for registration of URLs that doesn't require the entire IESG to vote?
> 
> Larry
> -- 
> http://www.parc.xerox.com/masinter