> On Feb 27, 2018, at 11:21, Russ Housley wrote:
>
>
>>> Minor issues:
>>>
>>> I think convention is to list the documents being updated in the Abstract,
>>> but
>>> cannot find any formal guidance.
>>
>> You’re right that is the convention, but it’s not required.
>> draft-flanagan-7322bi
>> Minor issues:
>>
>> I think convention is to list the documents being updated in the Abstract,
>> but
>> cannot find any formal guidance.
>
> You’re right that is the convention, but it’s not required.
> draft-flanagan-7322bis is attempting to make including updates in the
> abstract a mu
> On Feb 27, 2018, at 09:55, Sean Turner wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Feb 27, 2018, at 09:51, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
>>
>> On 02/27/2018 08:11 AM, Sean Turner wrote:
>>> There are two states for the Recommended column: YES and NO. I can go
>>> either way on whether
>>> marked as not recommended = NO
> On Feb 27, 2018, at 09:55, Salz, Rich wrote:
>
>
>> I thought we had always been clear that it was "not marked as
>> recommended", i.e., "we make no comment about its status".
>
> That was my understanding to. The choices are "recommended" or "no comment”
Yes, but we put “NO” as a colu
> On Feb 27, 2018, at 09:51, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
>
> On 02/27/2018 08:11 AM, Sean Turner wrote:
>> There are two states for the Recommended column: YES and NO. I can go
>> either way on whether
>> marked as not recommended = NO
>> not marked as recommended = NO
>>
>> WG - thoughts?
>
> I
>I thought we had always been clear that it was "not marked as
> recommended", i.e., "we make no comment about its status".
That was my understanding to. The choices are "recommended" or "no comment"
___
TLS mailing list
TLS@ietf.org
https://w
On 02/27/2018 08:11 AM, Sean Turner wrote:
> There are two states for the Recommended column: YES and NO. I can go either
> way on whether
> marked as not recommended = NO
> not marked as recommended = NO
>
> WG - thoughts?
I thought we had always been clear that it was "not marked as
recommende
> On Feb 20, 2018, at 14:50, Stewart Bryant wrote:
>
> Reviewer: Stewart Bryant
> Review result: Ready with Issues
>
> 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. Pleas
Reviewer: Stewart Bryant
Review result: Ready with Issues
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 comments just
like any other last call comments.
For m
