On Wednesday 14 February 2007 10:40, Stephen Farrell wrote:
Scott Kitterman wrote:
On Wednesday 14 February 2007 06:57, Stephen Farrell wrote:
As discussed in San Diego we need to revisit our milestone
dates. I suggest the following:
...
And that we progress the ssp-reqs to be an informational
RFC.
As one of those who weren't there, I'd appreciate it if you could provide
some information on the rationale for this change. From what little I
know of the IETF process, I'd have expected it to change to experimental
if it was goint to change....
Bit of confusion here maybe. We're talking about SSP-reqs being
informational (it doesn't exist in our current charter) but no
change to the goal of a standards track SSP protocol.
We're not currently envisaging any experimental RFCs from this
group.
Sorry. I misread. I got it now.
Thanks,
Scott K
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html