Hi SM,
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 8:50 AM, SM <sm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 8:50 AM, SM <sm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
At 00:05 21-08-2013, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
I'll suggest Expert Review here as it is a lesser barrier. I'll defer to you on this.As alluded to above, there can be quite a bit of information needed for an application to be defined beyond the defaults assumed when a name is registered. There didn't seem to be any need to require such definition to be in an IETF document, but it also seems as though more information than what's needed with just FCFS or DE or the other lesser rules is appropriate either.
Thanks for your suggestion. After more consideration, I think I'll leave it as is for the reasons described, and see where the IESG lands on it.
Cheers,
-MSK