On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 12:31 PM, Viktor Dukhovni <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 12:23:35PM -0400, Warren Kumari wrote: > >> A quick reminder to the WG about RFC 6982: Improving Awareness of >> Running Code: The Implementation Status Section. >> >> Authors, if you are aware of implementations of your proposal, please >> include an "Implementation Status" section in your draft. Showing that >> there are implementations demonstrates interest and shows that your >> idea actually works in practice. It also makes reviewer's,and document >> shepherd's, lives easier. > > The SMTP draft is in IETF LC. It has no such section, but running > code is in Postfix and Exim. Should anything be done at this (late) > stage?
Nope. The Implementation Status section is not mandatory, it just (IMO) shows the document in a better light. If you write a new doc (or have an existing doc that is not in LC) I see no downside to including this section. This reminder to the list was precipitated by a reminder that Benoit sent to the WG Chairs list -- it wasn't aimed at anyone in particular... W > > -- > Viktor. > > _______________________________________________ > dane mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dane -- I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in the first place. This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of pants. ---maf _______________________________________________ dane mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dane
