Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-behave-lsn-requirements-07

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

 



On Jul 3, 2012, at 14:24, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
> I found it is to be odd to have a requirements document as a BCP, but I am sure
> you can sort the right status out with IESG.

+1

I fail to see why Informational wouldn't be the better status.

Lars

<<attachment: smime.p7s>>


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