Nicolas Williams writes: > You could wait until the IESG issues the protocol action placing the I-D > on the Standards Track, rather than waiting for it to be an RFC.
I disagree with that in general. We *SHOULD* be implementing things that are the subject of I-Ds. That's exactly what I-Ds are for -- getting agreement among implementors. Waiting until they become RFCs or are in IESG review is just waiting far too long, and puts us behind in development. > In any case, there are *two* unexpired, individual submission I-Ds on > this topic. Both have "I-D Exists" as their status. That is definitely > not enough. The ARC should at least wait for there to be an AD No. As long as there's consensus on the subset of functionality that this project is proposing, I see no real problems here. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking <james.d.carlson at sun.com> Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
