Re: draft-eastlake-rfc2777bis-selection-01.txt

[Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>]

if the wg is being asked to adopt this as a wg document, i would
support, but not demand, that.

if the wg is being asked to agree that it is ok for the ietf
process to run it through as an individual submission, i.e. that
the wg does not see it as an end-run on the wg, i can agree to
that.  though i note that it does specify some process which might
more appropriately be in the base noncom document.  the old opsys
design of separation of mechanism and policy comes to mind.  but i
would not make a fuss as it stands.

i am not qualified to validate the code.

randy