Re: draft-katz-yeung-ospf-traffic-09.txt

[Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>]

>   We knew about this issue when the draft was coming out of the WG,
>   but didn't want to delay it more after way too many years in the
>   process--changing the IANA section would need another WG and IETF
>   LCs. The agreement was to quickly come up with a short document
>   updating just the IANA considerations section in this one. Would
>   this be fine?

I don't quite parse what you are saying.

To clarify, "the agreement" refers to which parties? The RTG ADs and
WG?

Also, it seems to be the IANA considerations doesn't quite make
sense. Are you saying you know that but want to ship it anyway and
that is not changable?

Note: bad IANA considerations have a way of biting us in the rear
later through vendor extensions.

Thomas