> Ned Freed wrote: > > keep the MUST for aliases but lose it for lists? I could > > live with that too but it would probably force a recycle. > I'd opt for "better standard" instead of "better status" > if these choices are in conflict. I question whether they are in conflict. In particular, I question whether removing this requirement will make this document significantly better, which IMO is the appropriate criteria for assessing a change at this point in the process. > The 2821bis / 2822upd > procedure is somewhat odd, first John insisted on doing > this simultaneously, and I thought that's not necessary. > Now I think he was always right, but what we really do > is out of sync: Likely 2822upd will pull NO-WS-CTL, or > move it to its "obs" chapter. > But the 2821bis in Last Call has a normative reference to > 2822, not 2822upd, and so it inherits obscure NO-WS-CTL > not limited to (non-existing) domain literals, it also > has cruft like DEL and horrors like NUL in a few places. I would prefer to have a reference to 2822upd, but I suspect this decision dates back to when it wasn't clear that 2822bis was going to get updated more or less at the same time. Ned _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf