Tom,
I suspect that we will get this wrong and IANA will fix it during their review.
Given that we don't know what the reference should look like, there is no sense
guessing.
Ron
> -----Original Message-----
> From: t.petch [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 7:42 AM
> To: Brian E Carpenter; Ronald Bonica
> Cc: 6man
> Subject: Re: Detailedl review of draft-ietf-6man-oversized-header-
> chain-06
>
> ---- Original Message -----
> From: "Brian E Carpenter" <[email protected]>
> To: "Ronald Bonica" <[email protected]>
> Cc: "6man" <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2013 9:00 PM
>
> > Hi Ron,
> >
> > That looks good to me, thanks!
> >
> > Regards
> > Brian
> >
> > On 06/09/2013 04:13, Ronald Bonica wrote:
> > > Brian,
> > >
> > > Would the following edits address the issues that you raise?
> > >
> > > Ron
> > >
> > >>
> <snip>
> > >> Nit:
> > >>
> > >> The reference [IANA-PROTO] needs to be verified by IANA - what is
> their
> > >> preferred URL for the registry?
> > >>
>
>
> They are not saying:-(
>
> In
> draft-leiba-cotton-iana-5226bis-03
> the nearest they come to saying, as far as I can see, how a document
> should reference a registry is
>
> " Providing a URL to precisely identify the registry helps IANA
> understand the request. Such URLs are usually removed from the
> RFC prior to final publication."
>
> Mmm one of those I-Ds which would benefit from discussion were there a
> place designated for discussion.
>
> Tom Petch
>
>
>
> > >> Regards
> > >> Brian Carpenter
> > >>
>
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
