Michael, On 01-Oct-21 06:43, Michael Richardson wrote: > > Brian E Carpenter <[email protected]> wrote: > > Where's the "Changes from RFC8366" section? We need that, for sure. > > What differences are there, anyway? I don't see anything significant > > in the diffs. So why would we want to adopt it? > > There are no changes yet > a) because the WG hasn't adopted it.
Of course not. It's a -00 individual draft with no interesting content compared to the RFC. > b) the WG hasn't reached consensus on the changes. I have no idea what changes you mean. > If I proposed an individual ID with changes in it, then that would be just my > opinion. Yes. That's how we do it. > That's I think that we should adopt a WG -00 that is near word-for-word > identical copy compared to RFC8366. That's backwards. Post a draft with some substantive changes to find out if the WG has any interest in those changes. Brian > > -- > Michael Richardson <[email protected]> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting ) > Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide > > > > _______________________________________________ Anima mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
