[auth48] Re: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9692 for your review

2024-12-12 Thread Pascal Thubert via auth48archive
Dear RFC editor Many thanks for your hard work. Speaking for myself only I approve your proposals below (but for beats see below) and I approve the draft for publication. Please see below some words on a small subset of the discussed items. In case of disagreement I’ll defer to the main editor

[auth48] Re: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9692 for your review

2024-12-12 Thread Pascal Thubert via auth48archive
Hello Alanna A bientôt; Pascal > Le 12 déc. 2024 à 22:43, Alanna Paloma a écrit : > > Hi Pascal, > > Thank you for your reply. The files have been updated accordingly. > Additionally, we have noted your approval on the AUTH48 status page for this > document. As there are questions that hav

[auth48] Re: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9696 for your review

2025-01-12 Thread Pascal Thubert via auth48archive
Dear editor I reviewed the changes and I approve the publication. Nit: in the change under fig 4, I'd add "via leaf 122" to clarify how the reflection happens. Many thanks Pascal Le dim. 12 janv. 2025, 07:01, a écrit : > Hi Madison and Pascal, > Pascal's email changed, so I forward this emai

[auth48] Re: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9692 for your review

2025-03-18 Thread Pascal Thubert via auth48archive
No objection! A bientôt; Pascal > Le 18 mars 2025 à 13:19, Jordan Head a écrit : > > No objections. > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Mar 18, 2025, at 6:58 AM, Alanna Paloma >> wrote: >> >> [External Email. Be cautious of content] >> >> >> All, >> >> As Dmitry indicated he reviewed the