[PANRG] Dependence on https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-panrg-path-properties/

[Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[e-mail]>]

Hi, Brian and Jen,

I apologize for causing confusion, but between the insertion of
explanations of "Path" and "Path Aware" in
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-panrg-what-not-to-do/, it looks
like I now have a dependency on both
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-panrg-questions/  (for "Path
Aware") and
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-panrg-path-properties/ (for
"Path").

The dependence on
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-panrg-questions/ seems like no
problem, because it's also in the publication process.

The dependence on
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-panrg-path-properties/ is a bit
more problematic, because that draft is still in the RG.

So, two questions.

   - Do we have any thoughts about when we're likely to request publication
   on https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-panrg-path-properties/?
   - Assuming that the answer is "not very soon", I note in the current
   text in
   https://github.com/panrg/draft-dawkins-panrg-what-not-to-do/commit/c9e40e60e854b19bf9acee0be31120f438226ac0
   hasically says "here's the definitions of 'Path' and 'Path Aware' that the
   RG is using, but all of the contributions contained in this draft predate
   the formation of PANRG, so may not reflect the descriptions in the drafts
   where those terms are defined". How wrong would it be to make that clearer
   in the next version of the draft, so that there isn't a dependency on
   https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-panrg-path-properties/?

I'd like to do the right thing, but I was included in the recent "AUTH48"
for cluster 248 with the RFC Editor, so I'd love to not delay publication
unless there's a really compelling reason to do that ...

Please advise, of course.

Best,

Spencer