[rfc-i] My comments on http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kowack-rfc-editor-model-v2-00.txt
ole at cisco.com
Tue Nov 16 22:33:29 PST 2010
Perhaps we can cast this as a series of questions:
1. Do we have a clear understanding of (and agreement about) the model
proposed in RFC 5260? If not, why not?
2. Does RFC 5620bis (or derivative in-progress versions thereof)
describe the same model in the whole with some variations, and do
we understand what those variations are?
3. Has Glenn explained why those variations or modifications were
introduced (or proposed)?
Otherwise, I do agree that this can quickly turn into an excercise of
"whisper a secret in your ear, pass it on" with (un) predictable
I very much agree that we should stop complaining about the form and
the size of the first version and focus on the core ideas and argue
about those. I know that's hard to do, but I don't see a good
alternative other than one that takes us back 10 months in time.
Ole J. Jacobsen
Editor and Publisher, The Internet Protocol Journal
Tel: +1 408-527-8972 Mobile: +1 415-370-4628
E-mail: ole at cisco.com URL: http://www.cisco.com/ipj
More information about the rfc-interest