On 10/12/16 12:55 AM, Eggert, Lars wrote:
Hi,
thanks for the review!
On 2016-10-11, at 21:21, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
(1) NIT: "RTT" is used without definition. (There used to be a definition but
it has been removed.)
I think this can be addressed by an RFC Editor Note.
Sure.
(2) NIT: unli
Hi,
thanks for the review!
On 2016-10-11, at 21:21, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
> (1) NIT: "RTT" is used without definition. (There used to be a definition but
> it has been removed.)
I think this can be addressed by an RFC Editor Note.
> (2) NIT: unlinked references
>
> I found a number of cases wh
