On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 5:49 AM Alvaro Retana <[email protected]> wrote:
> > The shepherd writeup says: > > > > > It is the proper type of RFC since it provides updates to RFC 6834 > Locator/ > > > ID Separation Protocol (LISP) Map-Versioning, which was an experimental > > > document. > > > > I don't follow. Only a Proposed Standard can update an Experimental? > > The Shepherd meant an update (lower case), not an "Update" (as in the > formal action). > > This document Obsoletes rfc6834. > Hi Alvaro, Right, I think the goal here is to reissue the Experimental material as Proposed Standard, after learning whatever was learned from the experiment. That's fine, and this should say that. As written, it looks like it might be continuing or re-starting the experiment, for which a Proposed Standard isn't necessary, and that's why I found this confusing. -MSK
_______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
