On the concepts draft refs, in -base we chose to redefine them in http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-p2psip-base-26#section-2 as it didn't appear concepts was moving forward. If -base doesn't include the terminology etc now, may want to simply move the content into the appropriate document.
Bruce On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 7:46 AM, Gonzalo Camarillo <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > both of these drafts (in the publication requested state) have > informative references to the concepts draft: > > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-p2psip-rpr-07.txt > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-p2psip-drr-07.txt > > Given that both draft state that they use the terminology defined in the > concepts draft "extensively", shouldn't those references be normative? > That is, downrefs. > > Also, what is the status of the concepts draft? > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-p2psip-concepts-04 > > Thanks, > > Gonzalo > _______________________________________________ > P2PSIP mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip _______________________________________________ P2PSIP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip
