Re: [Iasa20] Barry Leiba's Discuss on draft-ietf-iasa2-rfc7437bis-07: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[John C Klensin <[e-mail]>]

--On Sunday, 30 June, 2019 10:13 -0700 Bob Hinden
<[e-mail]> wrote:

>...
> I note this text is original to RFC7437, so unless we have
> heard from a NomCom that this has causing a significant NomCom
> problem, I continue to think that we shouldn't change it as
> part of the IASA 2.0 work.

Given other clarifications and improvements that have been
deferred on the grounds that they are out of scope for the IASA2
WG, I would have said "so even if we have heard...".  

IMO, it would be entirely appropriate to file an erratum against
7437 -- the text is unquestionably hard to follow -- and then
transfer / transpose that erratum for 7437bis.  It seems to me
that one of the things some combination of document authors, the
WG co-chairs, any concerned ADs, and the RFC Editor staff should
do as soon as numbers are assigned to these IASA2 documents is
to be sure that all errata on original documents that have not
been processed and incorporated in the replacement ones are
immediately duplicated for the new ones.  And, as I have said
before, I sincerely hope that the publication of 7437bis (and
similar documents) will encourage, rather than delay, drafting
of replacements or updates to deal with those out of scope for
IASA2 issues.

Otherwise, I hope obviously, +1

best,
  john