ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: I-D Action: draft-crocker-rfc2418bis-wgguidelines-01.txt

2015-10-28 23:45:55
I also do not think section 1.1 would inform any reader of any changes in 
process that this ID proposes
if there are no changes in process than it would be fine to say that otherwise 
it would seem to help 
the working group participants to know what they would need to do differently

Scott

On Oct 29, 2015, at 12:35 AM, Dave Crocker <dhc2(_at_)dcrocker(_dot_)net> 
wrote:

On 10/28/2015 9:11 PM, Scott Bradner wrote:
imo - any document that updates an existing document (especially technical 
standards and process documents)
needs to include a section that says what the differences are between the 
old version and the new version so
that readers can find out what they need to do differently than they have 
been doing

I do not see such a section in this document

Scott,

Section 1.1 contains a general statement about the nature of changes made.

But more importantly I believe your assertion of the specifics that are
needed is pretty much never met for any of the IETF document revisions
I've seen over the years.


d/
-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net