Re: Draft-ietf-nsis-ntlp: Late change of IANA consideration section

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

 



Thomas,

I.e., one could argue that all IANA considerations should be BCPs (and
they usually are when they are standalone), but we don't ask standards
track documents to move the IANA considerations to a separate document
just to make all our categories look clean... (and for good reason!)

I agree, but in this case the issue is even more fundamental than the document structure. If FOO is experimental technology, does it make sense to require that extensions of FOO are standards?

Jari

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
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]