>>>>> OPSAWG <opsawg-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of Henk Birkholz >>>>> <henk.birkh...@sit.fraunhofer.de> writes: > Not Ready
That wasn't the question Tom. This is not a WGLC. This is a WG adoption call.
by replying, I think you have indicated that you are interested in the WG
taking on this work?
> The linktype I-D is defective with its documentary references so the
> website is going to be as well. The number of references for links is
> considerable in the I-D although none appear as references of the I-D
> as anyone familiar with the work of the IETF would expect. Bringing
> this up to the standard expected of an IETF document would be
> considerable and it is not clear to me if it should be attempted.
I have simply no idea what you are saying.
Are you asking for every single entry in the registry to be documented to
IETF Specification Required level?
These are historical entries which were registered, essentially on a
First-Come First-Served basis.
> The I-D needs to acknowledge its deficiencies with respect to
> references. Whether it should try to provide references at all I am
> uncertain. It could enhance the website but I do not see it ever
> replacing the website.
> The I-D also needs to clarify what to do when the website and the IANA
> registry conflist
The web site content will go away, and/or reference the IANA.
> I think that this needs an executive decision. If the IETF cannot
> produce a specification to its usual standards, how far should it go?
> In passing, 65000 appears in two ranges.
Yes. [32678,65000) then.
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca> . o O ( IPv6 IΓΈT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
