David Harrington wrote:
Hi Eliot,
Having discussed this further with you and Rainer, I tend to agree the
changes are smaller than I originally thought.
So that the WG can properly assess this, can you produce an individual
draft with the proposed changes, so the WG can discuss the changes and
Hi Eliot,
Having discussed this further with you and Rainer, I tend to agree the
changes are smaller than I originally thought.
So that the WG can properly assess this, can you produce an individual
draft with the proposed changes, so the WG can discuss the changes and
their impact, and decide w
Hi,
Hi.
The WG consensus points that affect syslog-sign dependencies on
RFC3195 are:
1) remove RFC3195 references to RFC3164, and use the WG -protocol-
document as the appropriate replacement reference.
In most cases this is fairly straightfoward. As I indicated in my
email, and as
