Without commenting on the substance of the document, process-wise I would be OK with this as Experimental, if the WG thinks it's worth capturing state.
On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 7:05 PM, Salz, Rich <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hatless, I would tend to argue in favor of continuing to progress this > towards > > publication as an experimental standard and then revving it in the future > > based on implementation experience. > > Works for me! > > _______________________________________________ > Trans mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans >
_______________________________________________ Trans mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans
