I concur with Barry. I fear that the path Steve apparently
wants to go down --as I understand it, to incorporate warnings
in security considerations simply because a mechanism can be
used to transfer bad stuff -- leads to madness. But I'm happy
to have you discuss it with him to see if you, together, can
find an acceptable basis for moving forward.
john
--On Thursday, March 04, 2010 16:43 -0500 Barry Leiba
<[email protected]> wrote:
>> One argument is that he is suggesting non-normative
>> clarifications. From that standpoint, that seems reasonable
>> to include for yam-related work.
>>
>> A different argument is that there is, nonetheless, some
>> actual substance to the changes and that that is /not/ within
>> scope for yam.
>>
>> How does the wg feel about this?
>
> This WG participant feels great about having you discuss it
> with him, use your judgment, and make a recommendation to the
> WG about what we should do.
>
> Barry
> _______________________________________________
> yam mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yam
_______________________________________________
yam mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yam
