--On Wednesday, 12 December, 2007 17:05 -0800 Ned Freed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would prefer to have a reference to 2822upd, but I suspect > this decision dates back to when it wasn't clear that 2822bis > was going to get updated more or less at the same time. This is, of course, the sort of thing that can be changed in an RFC Editor note if, in fact, 2822 is ready and more or less concurrent. john _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
