Re: IETF Last Call conclusion for draft-ietf-6man-rfc2460bis-08

Hi Robert,

> On Mar 31, 2017, at 9:11 AM, Robert Raszuk <robert(_at_)raszuk(_dot_)net> 
> wrote:
>
> I do not understand how 2460bis makes it "easier" if proposed change to the 
> text directly tries to prohibit what is described in a document already long 
> time back accepted as a 6man working group draft.
First of all, adopting something as a working group document only means that it 
is a starting point. Adoption of a document does not mean that there is WG 
agrees with all the text in the document. That is why the document goes under 
WG change control.
Secondly, I have no idea what you are talking about in this specific case. What 
work in 

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-header-06 
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-header-06>

do you think is prohibited by this text? Can please provide a text quote from 
the draft?

Thanks
Suresh

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature