On 2013-04-22 17:55, Paul Hoffman wrote:
On Apr 22, 2013, at 8:12 AM, Viktor Dukhovni
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 08:00:22AM -0700, Paul Hoffman wrote:
On Apr 22, 2013, at 7:24 AM, Ond?ej Sur? <[email protected]> wrote:
a) do nothing
b) accept errata as is
c) start work on RFC6698bis and include this change
(c) seems good, and Viktor has already said that he is willing to
start on it.
Sure, but I started work on an "operational guidance" I.-D. If we're
updating 6698, the content would be quite different. Which is the
immediate
priority? A 6698 update or an operational guidance draft?
My thought is to create the operational guidance draft first and then
see whether the WG wants it separate or as a 6698bis. That decision
can be made late.
Sounds good to me.
Ondrej
_______________________________________________
dane mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dane
