+1 ! That is what UTA does to 'security' RFCs in majority of cases, BTW. Orit. _____________________________ From: Barry Leiba <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Sent: Monday, February 8, 2016 9:12 PM Subject: Re: wrt draft-ietf-uta-email-tls-certs To: =JeffH <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: IETF Discussion List <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
> This seems to me to be clearly "updating" or "profiling" RFC6125 normative > language, in the specific email use case. Profiling it for email, yes. Why should that make it *update* the document that specifies the general process? Profiles need to normatively reference what they profile, but not the other way 'round. Barry
_______________________________________________ Uta mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
