Dear Scott, Thanks for your kind support and review. The version 06 has been updated to address your concerns. https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-regext-bundling-registration-06.txt
section 7.2.3. EPP <renew> Command section 7.2.4. EPP <transfer> Command section 7.2.5. EPP <update> Command have refined the text and added the example according to your kind suggestion. Section 11. Security Considerations has been updated to add some words related security. CNNIC and some other registries have implemented this document, and tested the examples. Thanks a lot. Jiankang Yao From: Hollenbeck, Scott Date: 2018-10-02 19:29 To: 'j...@afilias.info'; 'regext@ietf.org' Subject: Re: [regext] Document Shepherd check on draft-ietf-regext-bundling-registration-05 I don’t recall seeing any discussion of or text changes to address my feedback. Here’s my note: https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/regext/current/msg01541.html Scott From: regext <regext-boun...@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Joseph Yee Sent: Monday, October 01, 2018 5:15 PM To: regext@ietf.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] [regext] Document Shepherd check on draft-ietf-regext-bundling-registration-05 HI all, I'm the document shepherd of draft-ietf-regext-bundling-registration-05. During review. The WG had made a last call on its -03 version (subject: [regext] WGLC: draft-ietf-regext-bundling-registration-03), and Scott Hollenbeck supported the publication but also raised concern on security consideration. I have not see any further discussion on this, I would like to ask whether WG closed the issue. Thanks to all. Best, Joseph
_______________________________________________ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
