Adrian,
Sounds good. Also, you seem to setting a policy just for yourself rather than the ISE role going forward by the use of the word "current". Is there any reason why? If you removed the word "current", and a future ISE wants to change the policy, they could certainly write another RFC, but this policy seems to terminate at the conclusion of your holding the role, which would require the next ISE to reissue or amend the policy. My suggestion would be to remove the word "current", so that future ISEs can take advantage of this policy without having to reissue the RFC.
Cheers,
Andy
On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 9:04 AM RFC ISE (Adrian Farrel) <rfc-ise@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Thanks Andy,
> The document certainly looks reasonable. Should you add a section
> discussing how it changes RFC 4846, so people don't have to refer back >
and compare?
Not sure a section is warranted, but the text in the Abstract and
Introduction will change to say...
This document updates [RFC4846] by adding a description of how the current
ISE will handle documents in the Independent Stream that request actions
from the IANA.
Cheers,
Adrian
--
Adrian Farrel (ISE),
rfc-ise@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
