Dave CROCKER wrote:
Based on Pasi's comments, I had thought we were going the RFC route.
Well, he has a preference for /only/ going that route, but he can't actually
veto our issuing the Errata under the Errata mechanism. Anyone can post
anything they want under the Errata mechanism. Some pretty silly stuff has
gotten posted, over the years.
I believe that what Dave is suggesting is an end run around the IESG.
In which case, I suggest that the working group insist on s/our/my/g;
above so that it has similar status.
Mike
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html