Re: [Ipoverib] Re: WG Last Call for DHCP draft

On Jan 27, 2005, at 2:49 PM, Vivek Kashyap wrote:

> True..I'm not convinced that a reference to every draft that may 
> become relevant has to be referred to .. if it was an RFC I'd 
> immediately put a reference in. The dhcp over infiniband draft is not 
> precluding any other use.


Vivek, this isn't a case of a draft that may become relevant.   The 
draft that I suggested you reference solves precisely the problem 
you're trying to address.   The reason I wrote the draft was to address 
problems raised by the DNS working group chair and several area 
directors in the RFCs that you are referencing - I didn't just make it 
up for my own personal satisfaction.   The language in your draft 
performs the same function as my draft - it isn't a case of them being 
loosely related.   I've made some suggestions for how to mitigate this 
conflict, but ultimately the right thing to do is to simply remove the 
conflict.

As to your question of whether the draft needs to be referred to, I'm 
willing to listen to arguments that you needn't reference the draft, 
and to look at text you propose to mitigate the problem.   However, 
it's still true that the easiest way to satisfy my concerns would be to 
reference the draft that I've advised you to reference.

You have to decide whether it's quicker to do as I ask and wait for my 
draft to make RFC, or to try to avoid referencing the draft.   It's not 
at all the case that I have final say in whether your draft advances.   
Do be aware, though, that there are two reasons why I've advised you to 
reference my draft.   One of them is that I think it's the right thing 
to do, and will lead to the best outcome.   The second is that if the 
draft passes the working group, I think following my advice about these 
specific concerns is the best way to get it through the IESG.   I may 
be completely mistaken about that, of course, but that's why I've given 
you this advice.