Thursday, June 11, 2009

Re: [Geopriv] Datum field changes in RFC 3825bis (affecting Sections 2, 2.1 and 6.2)

At 11:47 PM 6/10/2009, Bernard Aboba wrote:

>Some text probably belongs in the IANA considerations section
>describing how version numbers are allocated
>(presumably by Standards Action, no?)

I agree that we ought to mandate a Standards Track RFC is required to
change, update or obsolete this specification.


_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv