Paul,
On Wed, 23 Sep 2015, Melinda Shore wrote:
I haven't discussed this recently with Paul and he may
chime in with corrections or additional information, but I think
where we are with this is that if people want these documents
they really need to write initial drafts, and once we've got
agreement about the broad outline of the documents and the
drafts reflect that agreement we can put out a call for
adoption. For the purpose of wrapping up 6962-bis, the
information they need is what will be moved out of the -bis
draft and into another document. We definitely have
agreement to move client behavior into its own document.
I agree, but want to add a note that such a document should not hold
up the bis document. For example, what I don't want to see is that we
remove all client behaviour text from the bis document and then require
us to hold the document while the client document is being written. What
is fine with me is reducing parts of the bis text to scaffolding for
something we have adopted a separate document for.
As I noted in a message I just sent, I have been putting (candidate)
requirements
into the arch doc for all of the elements of the CT system other than
the log.
I think this is consistent with your comment above. Also, I thought we
agreed
that elements of client behavior (not directly related to log interactions)
are to be specified separately.
Steve
_______________________________________________
Trans mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans
