Margaret Wasserman writes:
>
> At 05:25 PM 8/5/2003 +0200, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> >I'll go for B, or perhaps A.9 (i.e. a version of B in which
> >we avoid recursive normative references between the two documents).
>
> If your version A.9 existed, I would have chosen it...
>
> I don't much care for the idea of gratuitous normative references,
> but I do believe that it makes sense to deprecate SLs and publish
> their alternative at about the same time.
This assumes that the consensus will be found
quickly for their replacement. I find that
*highly* dubious. The net result, IMO, will be
effectively ignoring the consensus in SF to
deprecate. Years passing before we publish the
deprecation document will effectively make it a
dead letter.
Oh, sigh me up for "A".
Mike
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
