On Sun, Apr 26, 2020 at 09:10:33AM +0200, Abdussalam Baryun wrote: > The draft should indicated on top first page that it updates RFC6775, > 7400, and 8505, it only shows updating RFC8505.
The 6775 case was discussed extensively during IESG Evaluation. Note that 8505 itself Updates 6775, and the changes in this document affect only what 8505 does (IIRC). I'm not sure why you want this document to update 7400 -- it seems to just be allocating some bits from the "6LoWPAN capability Bits" registry established by 7400. (Well, it would be if the IANA considerations were updated to state that, at least.) Allocating bits from a registry is usually not seen to need an Updates relationship. -Ben _______________________________________________ 6lo mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo
