On May 21, 2015, at 11:35 AM, Barry Leiba <[email protected]> wrote: > First: Thanks, Paul, for a very informative and useful shepherd writeup.
...but then... > I have no problem with the reference to Experimental RFC 5739, but I do > have a problem with the downref not having been noted in the last call > announcement, as required by RFC 3967 (BCP 97). And I think the MUST in > the last paragraph of Section 2.5 requires 5739 to be normative. I hate > to say this, but I think this requires a second last call on this > document, which will really serve no one. We really do need to do an > update to BCP 97 to fix this, because it comes up all the time. If the IESG wants to fix BCP 97, that's grand. Do note in the "very informative and useful shepherd writeup", it says: If this becomes too much of an issue for the purists, the reference can be moved to the Informative References section, but it is more appropriate as a normative reference. I really meant that. Instead of wasting everyone's time with another IETF LC, please strongly consider changing the DISCUSS to "yes, you need to move that reference to the Informational References" section. --Paul Hoffman _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
