Hi Ben and Kathleen, on References: ... <snip> ... > >>> > >>> -12: Are there really no normative references? The definition of a > >>> "normative > >>> reference" is any reference needed to fully implement or _understand_ the > >>> document. This is true for both informational and standards-track > >>> documents. Do > >>> you think a reader can fully understand this document if they ignore every > >>> reference? (I'm willing to accept that the answer might be "yes" given > >>> the > >>> nature of this draft--but that situation is rare in practice.) > >> > >> We'll think about this a bit more, thanks. > >>> > >>> > > > > To be clear, I’m perfectly happy if you decide that there really are > no normative references; I just wanted to make sure it was thought > about. > > OK, Al and I need to chat about this one still. > [ACM]
I gave this some thought, here's where I ended-up: * The references certainly help with understanding, but none are *unique* sources of background information that the reader should consult, if necessary. The necessary background can be derived from many sources. * There's no Normative text in the Informational Draft, so having Normative References doesn't seem a good match, to me. Al _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
