Salz, Rich <[email protected]> wrote: > That is great to hear, thanks for the careful analysis.
>> Some nits:
> All look like good things to do, I'll make a PR soonish.
> What do you think of just rewriting this to completely replace 6125,
> rather than trying to be a "diff RFC"?
If you mean, rfc6125bis, then it seems like it would risk opening wounds.
But, wholesale, "replace section X with ...." might be useful.
--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Anima mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
