On 29/05/2017 16:02, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> On 23/05/2017 13:25, Ben Campbell wrote:
> ...
>> - Is section 2 [Requirements] expected to be useful to implementers once
>> this is> published as an RFC? Unless there's a reason otherwise, I would
>> suggest
>> moving this to an appendix, or even removing it entirely. As it is, you
>> have to wade through an unusual amount of front material before you get
>> to the meat of the protocol.
>
> I'm open to that, and you are not the only reader with that comment.
> But we'd need WG consent...
I'm not hearing much from the WG but since several new readers have made
this comment, my proposal is to move the requirements into an Appendix.
If we don't like the look of it when done, we can always move them
back again.
Brian
_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
