Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index


I'd just like to comment on the history of the PAR numbering problem.  What
Tony and I have
been maintaining is a description of what 802.1 was told to do, rather than
a .1 view of what
ought to be done.

The confusing parts of Jim's draft arise from the same source as the
distinction: a system which assumes that all of one WG's output will
eventually end up in
a single standard.  802.1 has been given a scope of activity which doesn't
fit that model.

How about keeping the parts of the description which apply to Standard 802
and to the output
of the other WGs, and then simply saying that
(a) 802.1 produces multiple standards designated in the form 802.1x, where x
represents a
     letter, and
(b) the method of identifying supplements or revision to 802.1 standards is
under study.

Then we can change the troublesome bit without messing up the rest, which
works pretty

If I should see any additional rounds of discussion on this matter, someone
please copy me
in; I'm not on the Exec reflector.

Hal Keen