Scott, > On Oct 22, 2018, at 2:08 PM, Scott Bradner <sob@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > this is a separate issue about the iasa2 proposed updates > > come on - you update an RFC without including a section that says what changes you are making??? I agree, a documents that updates another RFC should be very clear about what is being updated. For example, RFC 8318 is very clear what it was updating in RFC7437, see Section 3.1. This was very helpful in working on RFC7437bis. > > are you purposely trying to make it harder for IETF participants to understand what’s going on? I don’t think anyone is trying to do this. I think "Hanlon's razor” applies here :-) Bob > > every RFC that updates another RFC needs (MUST?) have a section that tells the reader what has > changed - this is vital for any technical speck so the implementor knows what they have to change in > their implementation but its also very important in process documents so participants can understand > if they need to change how they do things > > so, be nice to the participants and admit (in writing) what changes you are proposing > > Scott > >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
