crickets? What is the plan? The PR is ok, except you need to add something to the abstract to say you are updating RFC 9148.
Deb On Tue, May 20, 2025 at 12:34 PM Michael Richardson <m...@sandelman.ca> wrote: > Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca> wrote: > > Deb Cooley <debcool...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I'd like to hear who is in favor as well. > > >> It might be useful to provide something concrete to review... a PR, > or > >> a diff, or something. > > > Like: > > mcr> You want more text than Toerless offered? > mcr> https://github.com/lamps-wg/lamps-rfc7030-csrattrs/pull/59/files > > > ## Update to RFC9148 > > The updates to EST in this document equally apply when using > CoAP as a transport as described in {{!RFC9148}}. > This document therefore adds the following paragraph after the second > paragraph > of {{RFC9148, Section 1}}: > > <aside markdown="block"> > RFC EDITOR: Please replace THISRFC with the RFC number for this document. > </aside> > > ``` > EST over CoAP as specified in {{!RFC9148}} applies unchanged > to {{!RFC7030}} updated by THISRFC. > Hence, all references to {{RFC7030}} in {{!RFC9148}} are assumed to > indicate > {{RFC7030}} updated by THISRFC. > ``` > >
_______________________________________________ Ace mailing list -- ace@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to ace-le...@ietf.org
