On 10/28/2015 3:50 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
But
I can't actually tell whether the draft reflects the original RFC, plus
its updates and errata, plus learnings from the running code.
I hate to say this, but I think the draft needs to go back to the drawing
board. I think it needs to proceed in small steps (a good example is
Brian,
Fortunately, the considerable effort of a protracted, painful sequence
you prescribe isn't necessary, because all of the different types of
evaluation you seek aren't really all that useful. This is not a
scientific process that needs fine-grained quality control.
It's merely an attempt to describe how to do some things.
So a simpler and -- I'll suggest -- more productive approach is to just
read the thing and react to it in its entirety.
The document is meant to be useful now. Today. Based on the rules and
expectations of the IETF. Today.
That should make it possible to read the text against that simple
framework and offer comments on that basis.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net