On Aug 20, 2022, at 10:07 AM, Warren Kumari <war...@kumari.net> wrote: > Pausing publication is an unusual, but definitely not unprecedented, step. > Although we are able to make changes until a document is published as an RFC, > once it is approved and sent to the RFC Editor, we should only make > (non-editorial) changes in exceptional circumstances…
Isn't this *exactly* what update documents are for? The protocol in draft-ietf-dnsop-svcb-https is already a standard; it simply hasn't been published as an RFC yet. It is also already widely implemented and deployed. If there is a problem with the protocol specification, particularly one that is re-litigation of earlier arguments, anyone can offer a new draft that updates the protocol. In this particular case, AliasMode was heavily discussed in the WG and the document was revised based on those discussions before the protocol was standardized. It would be good to understand why this particular case of feature re-litigation is enough to cause a message such as this. --Paul Hoffman
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
