Re: draft-housley-iesg-rfc3932bis and the optional/mandatory nature of IESG notes

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



John,

I suggest that it is not so much a conflict with the ongoing
work of an IETF WG, but a flat technical error.

And I would in general agree with you, but in this case the stuff was already deployed very widely, and the purpose of the publication was to document existing practice. I agreed that the draft had to be published as it was. Of course, a clean design would have been different, but what do you do?

Jari

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]