Personal opinion: I believe the document will have more impact if
published separately from the revision to RFC 2821. I also believe
that tying this to the revision of RFC 2821 would significantly delay a
published specification for how to use SMTP in the IPv6 world.
On Dec 10, 2003, at 10:47 PM, Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:
an updated version of draft-ietf-ngtrans-ipv6-smtp-requirement
to ADs: it may not reflect all the coments i have received, but
better than nothing. i think it should really be integrated into
update to RFC2821 (instead of being standalone document).
it is still using "ngtrans" in the name, however, it is suggested
the document should be discussed in APP area (there's no
WG exist at this point).
ADs: let me know how to proceed on this document. should we propose
changes to RFC2821, or? tnx.