On 16/02/2016 09:16, Warren Kumari wrote: > This is the third of 3 messages to determine what the OpsAWG should do with > TACACS+. > > If the answer to the previous question is yes, should the RFC describing > the protocol itself (as opposed to any other document that might describe > appropriate use) be published as a standards track RFC?
If it is only an accurate description of the currently deployed protocol, I couldn't care less whether it's Proposed Standard or Informational, as long as the IETF can make derivative works. If there are proposed extensions or changes, that should be standards track. Brian > > Scott, Tianran and Warren > > > > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg > _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
