I agree with Carl.
Young, if you like, feel
free to invite me to the ISO discussions and I will be happy to present ERS there.
And second I am not sure
I understood your initial email correctly: Do you propose to add some new text
to ERS, or was this just a clarification for the mailing list?
(if the first is the case,
as I would not want to miss any requests for change to the ERS, please send the
proposed text and section again.)
owner-ietf-ltans@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ietf-ltans@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Carl Wallace
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007
To: Young H Etheridge
Subject: RE: Clarification of ISO-IEC 18014
> From: Young H Etheridge [mailto:yhe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 17,
2007 8:47 PM
> Subject: Re: Clarification of
ISO-IEC 18014 documents
> Yes, the spec is rather opaque
in that regard. Fortunately,
> 18014-1-revised will do so.
> It seems to me that
aggregation would need to be built into
> extRenewal or other EXTENSIONS
in a standard way.
ISO spec would need to be enhanced and ported into the IETF. ERS achieves
these ends now and is already there.
> I agree the opportunity for
change has been waiting about for
> well over a year. How
many applications are ready for this
> draft to be a standard?
implementations have been cited on the list and at the WG meetings over the
last year or so. There is also an XML version out there (Aleksej?).