-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 05/07/2015 03:25 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>
>
*** Thank you Paul for your note. It's really appreciated.
The fact the P2PNames draft does not mention dnsop is because the
process suggests that RFC6761 requests belong to IESG.
Regards,
==
hk
-
On May 7, 2015, at 9:47 AM, hellekin wrote:
> I am definitely concerned with the fact that the P2PNames draft is not
> mentioned in [0] while draft-appelbaum-dnsop-onion-tld-01 was adopted by
> the WG, without any consideration for previous work, especially, as I
> mentioned before, with the ex
