Wes Hardaker <wjh...@hardakers.net> writes: > I believe we must allow for this possibility in the 4 columns even > when we may wish it won't be used.
Following myself, because I forgot my ending opinion: 1. I think that the current 8624bis document should not be combined with the phasing document, for the reasons I laid out. I believe the 8624bis document is functionally "done" and should be published. 2. I think the WG should consider adopting the phasing document, and that document should make use of the columns from 8624bis (it already does this). Thus, 8624bis is a base for the phasing document. -- Wes Hardaker USC/ISI _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- dnsop@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to dnsop-le...@ietf.org