Salz, Rich writes:
>This isn't right.
>
>We held up on advancing the frozen draft until we thought TLS-LTS was through
>the ISE process.
I pointed this out to the ISE editor but he just ignored it and blocked
publication anyway.
What's the appeal/review mechanism for getting this misuse of the
RFC 4846 states that you may ask the IAB to review the ISE's decision.
If they choose to do so (they don't have to), they may advise the ISE to
reconsider. You are welcome to use this route. If the IAB does advise
me to reconsider, I certainly will do so. I have made mistakes before.
Eliot
Re-sending because I had the wrong address for the ISE.
On 3/3/25, 12:07 PM, "Salz, Rich" mailto:rs...@akamai.com>>
wrote:
This isn't right.
We held up on advancing the frozen draft until we thought TLS-LTS was through
the ISE process.
___
This isn't right.
We held up on advancing the frozen draft until we thought TLS-LTS was through
the ISE process.
___
TLS mailing list -- tls@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to tls-le...@ietf.org
