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
