Hello Med, The changes from normative to informative referencing and the proposed nit have been implemented. A new rev has been submitted.
> I don’t think the normative language is needed here as these are > provided as additional information for more context. These are not > required to understand or implement draft-ietf-grow-bgpopsecupd. > Also, both I-D mentions seems to be out of context in a security > considerations section. Did I miss something? I am open to have this text placed elsewhere. The normative language is in place to address the issue that the informative documents may expire in the meantime. Please see the discussion on the issue in GROW since 119. > Can we please rework this part to avoid creating normative dependency > that would hinder the publication of draft-ietf-grow-bgpopsecupd? I currently see multiple pathways for actionable items in the request. Could you please be more specific on the changes you would like to see implemented? With best regards, Tobias -- Dr.-Ing. Tobias Fiebig T +31 616 80 98 99 M [email protected] Pronouns: he/him/his _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
