Just seeing this. As Shepherd, I agree that the change should be discussed by the WG.
Kent > On Feb 10, 2026, at 10:39 PM, Mahesh Jethanandani <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Thanks for sharing the screenshot of the set of changes. I went and looked at > all the revisions of the document including -25, the version approved by > IESG. This whole text is a completely new addition, and was never approved by > the WG or by IESG. As such, this cannot be approved, unless we poll the WG > regarding the change. Alternatively, we can just drop this new text. I will > also note that in later in the document, when it comes to IANA modules, we > insist that the reference statement contain the title of the RFC. As such, > these guidances are contradicting each other. >
-- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
