>
#.
It does not seem as if the NVO WG has
discussed the purpose of using normative
text in this draft. See detailed comments.
>
[Linda] The “Intended status” of the draft
is “Best Current Practice”. So all the
text are not “normative”. Is it Okay?
Not
really – this draft might be better
targeted as “Informational” as it is not a
comprehensive review of current practice
(best or otherwise) nor an overall set of
recommendations, e.g., as Bob wrote “it
just asserts what appears to be one view
of how a whole VM Mobility system works.”
At present we have no intention of changing the
intended status because that decision should be
deferred until IESG Review where we expect to
receive an authoritative view.
Having said that, I would encourage people to take
their best shot at recommending the intended status
going into IESG Review, because having 15 people who
haven't thought about the intended status as much as
other people should have, trying to figure that out
during a telechat week makes more sense if the document
comes in with an obviously inappropriate intended status
- if you can send a document with an appropriate
intended status, the document is more likely to come out
with the right status, in my experience.
Do the right thing, of course!
Spencer
