Warren Kumari <[email protected]> writes: > I stumbled across this while cleaning out my mailbox -- I *think* that > this makes sense, and that I should accept this as Hold For Document > Update ( > https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/processing-rfc-errata/ > ) - does anyone disagree? > If so, please let me know by Jan 5th.
I agree the word "unique" is odd there. I agree the update seems to make sense, but it would be sure be good to have the opinion of someone familiar with the original discussions to ensure we're not missing something and "unique" was intentional. (if it is intentional, clarification text would certainly be good) -- Wes Hardaker USC/ISI _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
