Russ Housley said:
"This is not an IETF problem, and I do not think that the IETF ought to
be discussing the internal workings of the ITU-T process. The point is
to come up with a mechanism that allows the code point to be assigned if
and only if the ITU-T does come to a consensus by whatever means is
allowed by their own process. "
[BA] Indeed, as a procedural matter, it should be clear that this is an IETF
last call on draft-betts-itu-oam-ach-code-point, not an IETF last call on
G.8113.1. As Russ has noted, draft-betts-itu-oam-ach-code-point can be
approved for publication, holding issuance of an RFC and assignment of a code
point until G.8113.1 is approved by the ITU-T. This guarantees that upon
publication of draft-betts-itu-oam-ach-code-point as an RFC, the reference will
be to a stable, ITU-T approved version of G.8113.1.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf