We were about to ask the WG chairs for a WG Last Call on this document, but then noticed that this is an informational document and its attempting to update a standards track RFC

Changing the "intended status" of a doc seems easier than spinning a new one. In any case, I would prefer to see the change and the context for it kept together.

Also, both/either document would benefit from a more meaningful abstract and intro. At the very least, briefly explain _what_ is being changed. (The abstract and intro of the current WG doc hint at "why", but still don't say "what". The new doc does neither.)

-- Sam

_______________________________________________
sidr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr

Reply via email to