And... just to close the loop... what is it they say ... one should trust but verify...
I thought we had had the discussion, but I didn't double check the document, assuming that we must not have said anything because of the discussion on the mailing list... and as has been gently pointed out to me...
The header itself for the section actually says...
"8. Implementation Status - RFC EDITOR: REMOVE BEFORE PUBLICATION"
So, like everyone else, I jumped on a conversation before verifying the underlying assumptions... A lesson for all...
Karen
On 2/19/20, 10:37 AM, "Karen O'Donoghue" <odonoghue@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Folks,
Suresh said this but let me reiterate... It was never the plan for the list of implementations to be in the final RFC. It will be removed in the publication phase. We should have indicated as such in the draft and that was my mistake for not catching it.
Karen
On 2/19/20, 10:31 AM, "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I think a list of implementations is a bad idea.
I could not agree more!
--
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
