filexfer: Proposed revision

[Joseph Galbraith <galb-list%vandyke.com@localhost>]

In Section 3.3, we have the following text:

> The use of additional packet types in the non-extension
> range MUST be introduced through IETF consensus. New
> packet types to be sent from the client to the server
> MAY be introduced without changing the protocol
> version (Section 4). Because the client has no way
> to respond to unrecognized packet types, new packet
> types to be sent from the server to the client the
> client MUST not used unless the protocol version is
> changed or the client has negotiated to received them.
> This negotiation MAY be explicit, through the use of
> extensions, or MAY be implicit, by the client itself
> using a packet type not defined above.

Do we really need this much verbosity, or would the
following paragraph do:

> The use of additional packet types in the non-extension
> range MUST be introduced through IETF consensus.  New
> packet types MAY be introduced without changing the
> version where this can be done in a backwards compatible
> way.

What do people think?

Thanks,

Joseph