Alan DeKok <al...@deployingradius.com> wrote:
> This revision has the changes discussed during the interim which was held
yesterday.
The new document should probably reference which errata it fixes.
Some have done this in the document, some with actual Informative references.
> There are still open questions on two errata:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5770
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5775
I tried to handle the meeting notes yesterday, and I have some suggestions to
make this more tractable for everyone.
I imagine that we have to do another virtual interim to get through the rest.
(They could be design team meetings, that's up to the chairs)
First, some a slide per errata with links to all the right places can be
helpful for engaging participants in the issues. It also helps with the WG
history.
If not, then I suggest prepping the agenda into the note taking space, with
all the links you need, and then screen share your view of the notes.
Second, if you send fewer pixels, then scaled, they will be bigger on the
recipient end. Share only a tab or a window, not your whole screen.
(Mac has challenges here which not every browser seems to get right, due to
the "window" including the File/Edit menus...)
"Works best in 640x480" is still true :-)
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Emu mailing list Emu@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu
