[DNSOP] Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8109bis-06: (with COMMENT)

2024-08-21 Thread Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker
Murray Kucherawy has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8109bis-06: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer

[DNSOP] Re: [Ext] Request: Review changes - draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc7958bis-03 → 04.

2024-08-21 Thread Warren Kumari
On Wed, Aug 21, 2024 at 10:28 AM, Edward Lewis wrote: > On Aug 20, 2024, at 20:42, Michael StJohns > wrote: > > Hi Paul - > > I'm confused from your responses below - is this a WG document where the > WG gets to decide, or is this an IANA document (like the one it was > replacing) where IANA get

[DNSOP] Re: [Ext] Intdir telechat review of draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8109bis-06

2024-08-21 Thread Dirk Hugo
Hi Paul I am fine with that, thanks! Best regards Dirk On Mon, Aug 19, 2024, 5:06 PM Paul Hoffman wrote: > Thanks for the review! Those nits are the kind of thing the RFC Editor > picks up, so unless we have to revise the document for the IESG, we'll let > them catch them during the editorial pr

[DNSOP] Re: [Ext] Request: Review changes - draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc7958bis-03 → 04.

2024-08-21 Thread Michael StJohns
Hi Ed - Thanks for a thoughtful reply.  Notes in line. On 8/21/2024 10:28 AM, Edward Lewis wrote: On Aug 20, 2024, at 20:42, Michael StJohns wrote: Hi Paul - I'm confused from your responses below - is this a WG document where the WG gets to decide, or is this an IANA document (like the one

[DNSOP] Re: [Ext] Request: Review changes - draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc7958bis-03 → 04.

2024-08-21 Thread Edward Lewis
On Aug 20, 2024, at 20:42, Michael StJohns wrote: > > Hi Paul - > > I'm confused from your responses below - is this a WG document where the WG > gets to decide, or is this an IANA document (like the one it was replacing) > where IANA gets to decide? I *think* I saw you argue both ways in you