In message <0F8DC6A4B302BD40621C69AF(_at_)scan(_dot_)jck(_dot_)com>, John C
Klensin writes:
Brian,
We agree about the desirability of making sure than some things
are explicitly documented and explicitly part of what gets
reviewed. But I continue to believe, as I have believed for
years, that adding more and more mandatory material to RFCs or
I-Ds is not the best solution to that particular problem.
From where I sat, the problem was trying to ensure that a WG thought
about an issue. Neither mandatory material nor checkoff boxes
accomplish that, but I think the former is often more useful because
material in an I-D is visible to the entire WG.
--Steven M. Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf