Hello, world!
I think it might soon be time for submitting the updated Gopher RFC. In my belief, it should be within a month at most, as we have a very good document authored and edited by some of this mailing list's best minds (i.e. Kim Holviala, Matjaz Viste, Dr Kaiser, etc).
But before the RFC is submitted, there are some organisational quirks that need to be fulfilled. I suppose I *could* submit the draft RFC (available at
http://piratepad.net/gopher) as an independent document, but that would only be for informational purposes, rather than putting it on the standards track.
I believe that what we currently have is a standard in a formative stage. This is not simply information, or quirky RFC engineering humour. This is the new standard for Next-Generation Gopher (call it GopherNG if you like, or Gopher++, I still haven't figured out a decent name for it). If I send this as an independent submission and credit everyone, it'll never be anything other than simple "information".
The better way forward, at least in my view, is to submit it through the usual channels. This involves more work, some of which I concede that I am not familiar with. For instance, there will need to be a working group; I propose that this mailing list become one. but it needs a charter and it needs to be listed on the IETF's page, which is the part of the job I'm ignorant of (can't find the link to submit a working group for instance).
So I guess you can take this as a request for help. Has anyone ever been through the IETF's Kafka-esque methods of working yet? Can you elucidate them for me? Should this simply be informational maybe?