On Fri, 12 Feb 2016, Alan DeKok wrote:
Why is it necessary to have a standards track document? What's wrong with
informational?
I've respected you by answering your questions and explaining my position.
Please consider doing the same for me.
As far as I know, I have never insisted it needs to be a standards track
document. I just re-read all my email I have sent on this issue, and I
have consistently used the term "documented in an RFC".
... so you blame me for not reading your email, but it seems you're not
reading mine, or putting words in my mouth I never uttered and asking me
to argue for a position I have never taken.
I don't care if the document is Informational or Standards track, but I
still want the document. You have opposed the document to be created at
all, and that's what I have been arguing against.
--
Mikael Abrahamsson email: [email protected]
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
