Hi.
It has been about 6 weeks since responses to the review were postponed till
after IETF 101.... any thoughts yet?
Regards,Elwyn
Sent from Samsung tablet.
-------- Original message --------From: Elwyn Davies <elw...@dial.pipex.com>
Date: 02/03/2018 12:04 (GMT+00:00) To: Brian E Carpenter
<brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com>, gen-art@ietf.org Cc:
draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane....@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Gen-art]
Gen-art LC Review of
draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane-13
Just taking up one point for the time being....
Even if the reference model is informational, I was relying on RFC 8067, s1,
para 3:
Section 2 of [RFC3967] lists some conditions under which downrefs may
make sense. In addition to those, it has become common for working
groups to produce foundational documents (which contain important
information such as terminology definitions and architectural design
and considerations) at Informational status, and those documents are
often needed as normative references in the Standards Track protocol
documents that follow.
I would say that sombody implementing ACP really needs to have read and
understood the reference model and so I would argue:1. That it needs to be
normative,and2. The downref is sanctioned by the language in RFC 8067.
I am on holiday for a week and others are fighting the draft deadline so
perhaps we can postpone discussion of the other points until the draft panic
has subsided.
Cheers,Elwyn
Sent from Samsung tablet.
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
