Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> I can think of two explanations.
>>
>> 1) the author is not familiar with the processes and thinks that I-D
>> Nits it ordering the author to reclassify the reference
>>
>> 2) the author is familiar with the processes and is trying to game the
>> system.
> There's a possible 3rd explanation:
> 3) the reference didn't need to be normative in the first place.
> I certainly saw that a number of times as a Gen-ART reviewer.
How can a third party point this out, unless they can read the document?
The converse is worse: some informative reference that actually is normative,
but only implementers two years later recognize this.
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@xxxxxxxxxxxx> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
