On 2021-03-15 15:56, Salz, Rich wrote:
> *>* I think it would be much better to rewrite RFC 6125 with all the patches
> applied, and then have that new document obsolete RFC 6125 instead of
> updating it.
>
>
>
> I took another look at 6125 and I am happy to put up a draft if the WG
> prefers that approach.
>
That is still a possible outcome of a WG draft - nothing forces us to publish
as a separate doc.
Cheers Leif
_______________________________________________
Uta mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
