Re: [Ecrit] PhoneBCP

["Dawson, Martin" <Martin.Dawson at andrew.com>]

+1 - and, quite particularly, on the basis that it isn't an
"applicability statement" it's a statement that effectively says that
there are some domains where the framework is applicable but there'll be
aspects to the domain that aren't specifically described by the
framework and that... well... you'll just have to think about.

Since this is a truism, its presence is a tautology and unnecessary.

Having said all that - and given the motives driving the creation of
this "sound bite" are transparent, I'd rather let the people playing
politics have their way with the document since, clearly, the threat is
that they'll just stonewall it indefinitely otherwise. Hopefully common
sense will out in time regardless.

Cheers,
Martin

-----Original Message-----
From: ecrit-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:ecrit-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf
Of Henning Schulzrinne
Sent: Monday, 27 April 2009 11:43 PM
To: Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)
Cc: ECRIT
Subject: Re: [Ecrit] PhoneBCP

+1

On Apr 27, 2009, at 8:34 AM, Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo) wrote:

> I hum against the applicability statement. I cannot see why we need  
> one.
>
>
> Ciao
> Hannes
>

_______________________________________________
Ecrit mailing list
Ecrit at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This message is for the designated recipient only and may
contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information.  
If you have received it in error, please notify the sender
immediately and delete the original.  Any unauthorized use of
this email is prohibited.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[mf2]