[ncc-services-wg] Pre-PDP discussion: "PDPs should be renamed from YYYY-NN to RIPE-PDP-YYYY-NN-vN"
Sascha Luck lists-ripe at c4inet.net
Sat Mar 16 17:51:39 CET 2013
On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 03:20:31PM +0000, Alex Le Heux wrote: >I think that overloading the name in such a way is only useful if both >2014-86-APWG and 2014-86-NCCSERVICES are possible. If the serial number of >a proposal is unique across the different working groups, I don't see a >need to include the WG in the name. > >Otherwise we should also consider including things like the name of the >proposer, current stage of the PDP it is in, version, etc, etc :) Or put the metadata in a block at the start, like it is done in RFCs? cheers, Sascha Luck > >Alex > >