Indeed, they was the conclusion of the transport area at the time. I would also prefer we could stick with that better solution, but more importantly I don’t want this document stopped by a DISCUSS on either side of this argument.
Paul Sent using a virtual keyboard on a phone > On Aug 25, 2022, at 12:28, Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca> wrote: > > >> On Aug 25, 2022, at 00:52, Erik Kline <ek.i...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I think this document needs to request a protocol number from IANA. > > Erik, the WG had this debate at length two+ years ago. > > I feel that the WG, through our AD, asked the IESG and the IntArea and > Transport Area this specific question in a number of different ways to be > sure. > > We decided not to go that way because we felt that it was a waste of a very > scarce resource. > > -- > Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting ) > Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide > > > > > _______________________________________________ > IPsec mailing list > IPsec@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
signature.asc
Description: Binary data
_______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
