Carlos Pignataro wrote:
> The more practical approach, considering the above, seems to progress this
> document as an RFC and use the same BCP 161 (as RFC6291) -- not sure how
to
> signal that in the I-D.
Yes, adding this new RFC to BCP161 would make sense.
I don't think that there
Reviewer: Behcet Sarikaya
Review result: Almost Ready
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft for an early review. The
General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just like any
other last call
