[saag] Re: draft update on discussion on crypto practices at IETF
Stephen Farrell <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.saag |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hiya, On 23/01/2025 12:48, Carsten Bormann wrote: > Ah, that is a very different argument from “an RFC MUST NOT be > produced”. For the example in question, there's a difference between the perspectives of the sender and recipient of the message though: if the author of the I-D is constantly told "an I-D is sufficient" when that author wants the I-D to become an RFC, the effect is the same as if they'd heard "an RFC MUST NOT be produced." Cheers, S. _______________________________________________ saag mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
OpenPGP_signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 236 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- wnsEABYIACMWIQQwbnhHy1kPJkWsM6fk2On5l6gz3QUCZ5I8OwUDAAAAAAAKCRDk2On5l6gz3Wzo AQCvkiiFj3c6+J+MNNd47Lkq4VwL6sxef0OJ7sgB0g+FBAEA+9v2qUieUaGrP2/amb8pZ06/BdwV QZ3fyxYs5T8Lywk= =z88o -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----