I just noticed the responses were not sent to Gen-art, IETF, or
draft-ietf-jose-json-web-signature@tools.ietf.org. Forwarded thread
for transparency on review.
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 6:00 PM, Mike Jones
wrote:
> So that there are no surprises, I’m also annotating the proposed
> resoluti
Hi Mike,
I'm just going through the updates to reflect the changes in the draft from
the IETF last call and the drafts look pretty good. I do think an
informative reference to the developing set of best practices for TLS
should be included in Section 8 on requirements for TLS. Here is the link
a
Brian,
Thank you for your review. I agree, the shepherd report should be amended
to remove the 'updates' language since the extensions are optional.
Thank you,
Kathleen
On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 11:59 PM, Brian E Carpenter <
brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewe
Hi Matt,
Thank you for your review! The editors will take these comments into
consideration and discuss any updates. I'll note that the draft was
pulled from the telechat and will likely not go through last call
again until sometime around Buenos Aires due to some other changes
that came up. Yo
Orit,
Thanks for the review, making sure the editor see this.
Kathleen
On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 5:30 PM, Orit Levin wrote:
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review
> Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for
> the IETF Chair.
Hello Matt,
I'd just like to confirm that you are good with the updates provided as a
result of your review.
Thank you for your review.
Kathleen
On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 11:02 AM, Matt Miller wrote:
> Hello Oiwasan,
>
> Thank you for your response, and look forward to reading the next revision.
Thank you for the review and nits!
Kathleen
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 7:08 PM, Meral Shirazipour
wrote:
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review
> Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for
> the IETF Chair. Please treat these com
Sent from my mobile device
> On Nov 18, 2017, at 2:34 PM, MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) wrote:
>
> Thanks for your review, Meral,
> we’ll make these changes in -14.
Yes, thank you for your review, Meral!
Kathleen
>
> regards,
> Al
>
> From: Meral Shirazipour [mailto:meral.shirazip...@ericsson.c
Sent from my mobile device
> On Mar 30, 2018, at 5:20 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> TLS 1.3 has been approved by the IESG and it's on its way to the RFC Editor,
> so
> I don't really see this changing any time soon for the base RFC.
>
> I think there's some debate about whethe
Good morning Brian,
Thank you. I will make the updates later today. I had changed my contact
information in the version 3 that was really just a contact update, but I
went back to my original document for version 4 and must have overlooked
that change.
As for the WS-security, should I leave tha
Hello Ben,
Thank you for the feedback. I have addressed your comments and submitted an
updated draft. I will outline below how the comments were addressed, please
let me know if there are any additional issues.
Thank you,
Kathleen
-Original Message-
From: Ben Campbell [mailto:[EMAIL PR
Hi Ben,
I will try to get the update out before the 5 PM cut off. As for #1, Brian
could answer that question better than I could. There was a reason that we
just referenced WSDL as an ancillary tool. I'll leave that alone for now
unless Brian or someone else points out the need to revisit th
Thank you, Mohit, Stephen, and Alyssa!
On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 2:34 PM Alissa Cooper wrote:
> Mohit, thanks for your review. Stephen, thanks for your response. I
> entered a Yes ballot.
>
> Alissa
>
> On Nov 25, 2020, at 6:47 AM, Stephen Farrell
> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 25/11/2020 11:46, Mohit Sethi
13 matches
Mail list logo
