On 6/27/14, 3:09 AM, "Juergen Schoenwaelder" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>I've also heard support for having it in. I think that what it says is >> accurate - >> that WGs will be asked to think about whether write operations are >>needed >> in MIBs going forward. >> >> Can you suggest a rewording that you'd be comfortable with? > >The edit is to simply remove the sentence. > >And I disagree that the statement says that "WGs will be asked to >think about whether write operations are needed in MIBs going >forward". WG] well, the observation is accurate, whether the statement actually says that or not, because people will ask. Alia, since I'm the one that suggested that we address this, I suggest that you simply make an informative reference to the statement without a lot of editorializing, possibly just quoting the relevant part that Juergen included in his response. Thanks, Wes Anything below this line has been added by my company’s mail server, I have no control over it. ----------- This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout. _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
