mohamed.boucad...@orange.com wrote: >> draft-ietf-opsawg-pcaplinktype - Standards Track to create Registry
> I thought that we agreed that this justification for PS is not accurate > (1): "linktypes "highest" level is Specification Required". A better > reason should be provided. I'd heard that the ISE couldn't create registries of the kind we wanted, and that WG processing was not too a difficult change. > BTW, any update about how you addressed the comments: > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/opsawg/7yE7THneT48DBzmGq3e5M_bwOok/? I would do a final pass to import linktypes.html just before WGLC, and then update linktypes.html to note that new document exists. -- Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- *I*LIKE*TRAINS*
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg