Hi Amanda, I approve the registration.
I have an editorial comment on Section 5.1 (which supplies the specification that the IANA considerations reference). This has a rather terse definition of the “cursor” field, with no indication on where to continue reading (there is an example that gives a hunch of at least one intended usage). There are 135 occurrences of the word “cursor”, so it would be rather tedious to find the places where the use of the field in problem details is actually defined. Could a reference from Section 5.1 to that text be added? Grüße, Carsten > On 10. Jul 2024, at 22:51, Amanda Baber via RT > <drafts-expert-review-comm...@iana.org> wrote: > > Hi Thomas, Carsten, > > We had to submit our ballot response to the IESG today, so we marked it "IANA > NOT OK." Can one of you get to this one before the telechat (1400 UTC > tomorrow)? > > thanks, > Amanda > > On Tue Jul 09 01:55:07 2024, amanda.baber wrote: >> Hi Thomas, Carsten, >> >> Sending a reminder for this review request. Can you get to this one >> before Thursday? >> >> thanks, >> Amanda >> >> On Wed Jul 03 02:10:21 2024, amanda.baber wrote: >>> Hi Thomas and Carsten (cc: ace WG) >>> >>> Can you review the new Custom Problem Detail Key registration in this >>> document by Wednesday, July 10th? >>> >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ace-revoked-token- >>> notification-08 >>> >>> This document is on the July 11th IESG telechat agenda. The >>> registration was added after IETF Last Call, so we just now caught >>> it. >>> >>> Unless you ask us to wait for both experts, we'll consider the review >>> complete after we receive the first response. >>> >>> thanks, >>> >>> Amanda Baber >>> IANA Operations Manager > _______________________________________________ Ace mailing list -- ace@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to ace-le...@ietf.org
