On 7/28/18 7:02 AM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> Thanks for pulling up the primary source; I was just going on the chairs'
> summary of the issues and apparently only noticed an unrelated potential 
> issue.
> Clarifying that the 64-bit timestamp format (with callout to Sectino 6 of
> RFC 5905) is the correct one sounds like a fine thing to do.

D'oh!  But in fairness the what was under discussion was in
response to the meeting minutes, which do accurately capture
the discussion in Montreal.  I'll bug the authors.

Melinda

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

Reply via email to