On 11/11/20, 10:09, "OPSAWG on behalf of Toerless Eckert" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote:
>> This is really a win-win opportunity. The PCAP developers need a
place that helps them formally
>> state extensions and they need a way to not trip over one another on
extension numbers.
>> Does that mean we have to take the doc as it is? No. But changes
should simply be
>> by consensus, and I doubt you will find a lot of consensus for
frivolous changes.
>
> Let me know which of my asks you think is frivolous.
Since you asked - I find your "ask" to change the format *at this point*
frivolous.
I recommend adopting this draft as-is.
If the WG down the road develops a *consensus* to change the format, so be it.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
