|
Russ Housley said:
"This is not an IETF problem, and I do not think that the IETF ought to be discussing the internal workings of the ITU-T process. The point is to come up with a mechanism that allows the code point to be assigned if and only if the ITU-T does come to a consensus by whatever means is allowed by their own process. " [BA] Indeed, as a procedural matter, it should be clear that this is an IETF last call on draft-betts-itu-oam-ach-code-point, not an IETF last call on G.8113.1. As Russ has noted, draft-betts-itu-oam-ach-code-point can be approved for publication, holding issuance of an RFC and assignment of a code point until G.8113.1 is approved by the ITU-T. This guarantees that upon publication of draft-betts-itu-oam-ach-code-point as an RFC, the reference will be to a stable, ITU-T approved version of G.8113.1. |
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf