On 29/10/2009, at 6:18 AM, John G. Scudder wrote:
George and all,
On Oct 27, 2009, at 7:46 PM, George Michaelson wrote:
I wish to request you as as working group chair to conduct a
Working Group Last call on the following documents of which I am a
co-author:
...
draft-ietf-sidr-roa-validation-03.txt
This draft says that its intended status is Informational. Does
that correctly represent what you think should happen with this
document? I.e., that it be published as an RFC but not as any kind
of a standard? (See also the RFC 2026 definition of "Informational".)
If so that would seem to suggest that the apparent conflict with
draft-pmohapat-sidr-pfx-validate-03.txt is moot, since an
Informative document, strictly speaking, can't conflict with a
Standards Track document.
Thanks,
Thanks for this observation John. If I understand this right, surely
this means that Randy's WGLC objection to draft-ietf-sidr-roa-
validation-03.txt is therefore moot, as there is no apparent conflict.
cheers
-George
--John
_______________________________________________
sidr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
