On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Scott Kitterman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > My plan is to work towards option (b) unless there's some better consensus > developed around one of the other choices. > > Option (a) would require an update later after 4408bis is published. Since > there's almost no chance (given the way the SPFbis charter discussions are > going) that 4408bis will be materially different relative to this group's > work, I think such an update wouldn't be a low value added use of time. > > Similarly, I think waiting for 4408bis to publish would be pointless waiting. > I'm aware of likely implementors and waiting won't help them either. > > Scott K >
This makes the msot sense to me. Mike _______________________________________________ marf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf
