Carsten Bormann <cabo@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Another example to consider: RFC 4815.
> For RFC 4815, we ultimately went for standards-track, and with
> hindsight I have no idea why one would do otherwise.
and I think Klensin would be happy with that designation.
> I’m currently proposing to do a similar document for CoRE.
sounds reasonable. Care to comment on your views of the relative effort of
doing this vs a -bis document? Would roach-bis change that for you?
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Sandelman Software Works
-= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
