On 6/16/16 10:24 AM, Salz, Rich wrote:
A very good principle here is: "No" is temporary; "Yes" is forever. If you're not sure about a new feature, say no. You can change your mind later. (https://github.com/docker/libcontainer/blob/master/PRINCIPLES.md#libco ntainer-principles)
That's a nice principle, but doesn't seem to hold in the IETF scale of things.
If you're talking about overall process I don't think that's true. If you're talking about the time and effort it takes to standardize something, alas, yes, and it seems likely to me that any name redaction work in the future is likely to be as heavily contested as it is now. That does not mean, however, that it's not appropriate to defer a name redaction specification into another, later document for any number of reasons (including trying to get 6962-bis out sooner rather than later and trying to avoid being an example of process sludge). I think the core question here is whether publishing 6962-bis without it will make it difficult to specify name redaction in the future. Melinda _______________________________________________ Trans mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans
