> On Dec 14, 2020, at 02:52, Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <nore...@ietf.org> > wrote: > > Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-tls-ticketrequests-07: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tls-ticketrequests/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Thank you for the work put into this document. It is short and easy to > understand. > > I find that the contents of section 1 and of section 2 are quite duplicate.
While true, I do sometimes find we end up here because there have been requests to move information forward to the introduction in the draft. Unfortunately, that results in some duplication. I would like to propose that if the draft does not contradict itself that we leave it as is. > In section 2, the use of capitalized word after a ":" looks weird to me but I > am not a native English speaker. I suspect that his might be a style thing so I would like to leave this one for the RFC editor. > I hope that this helps to improve the document, > > Regards, > > -éric > > > _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
