Re: [Pearg] Call for Adoption: Two drafts on Numeric IDs

[Fernando Gont <[e-mail]>]

On 14/8/19 16:56, Eliot Lear (elear) wrote:
> This is good work. 

Thanks!


> One question:
> 
> Do people really care that much about a *complete* woeful history of
> RFCs that got it wrong?  Might it make sense to get a bit more succinct
> and in the process combine the docs?  That way the 2nd doc is well
> motivated. 
> 
> Anyhow I view this point as editorial. 

Responding to your comment:

Originally, the two documents being part of the wg call for adoption,
plus draft-gont-numeric-ids-sec-considerations, where all part of the
same document (draft-gont-predictable-numeric-ids).

We split the document into three pieces, upon request by folks at a
secdispatch (?) meeting. -- the rationale was that -history was mostly
informational, whereas -generation was more of a bcp, and
-sec-considerations was a different kind of bcp.

As authors, we wouldn't mind if the two docs where merged. Although I'd
agree that that would be kind of "editorial", and the high order bit
know is weather the RG wants to work on these docs.

Thanks!

Cheers,
-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: [e-mail]
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492