[AFS3-std] Re: New version of the AFS 64-bit time I-D

[Simon Wilkinson]

On 6 May 2011, at 23:29, Andrew Deason wrote:
>=20
> I think I heard someone may have wanted something for 'absolute' in =
the
> first type name... would AFSAbsTime, AFSRelTime, and AFSTimeRes be =
okay?

I think if you're making AFSTime AFSAbsTime, then AFSTimeRes should be =
AFSAbsTimeRes, just to preserve symmetry.

> Also, should I put the "this is not an IETF standard" paragraph
> somewhere in the front matter? Does it go in an existing section, or
> should I make a new one? That is, this paragraph from the ISE
> discussions:

My temptation would be to see what happens with the progression of our =
"test" document through the ISE queue, before we make changes to other =
documents. That said, there's no harm in adding that text now - just =
that the positioning, and even the language, may end up being changed =
before this document reaches them.

Cheers,

Simon.