Hi Rich, I reviewed these changes, and agree, they look good. Thanks for doing them. I left a few comments/suggestions on the GitHub PR for possible clarity, but these are not blocking and entirely optional.
On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 11:21 AM Salz, Rich <rsalz= 40akamai....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > I have a number of editorial changes I want to make to the draft. > > > > Most of them are about avoiding redundant terms like “client” instead of > “interactive or automated client” and CA, etc., instead of “certification > authority”, etc. The diffs are big (83 lines added and 95 lines removed, > for a diff of 440 lines) so I won’t post it here. You can find it at > https://github.com/richsalz/draft-ietf-uta-rfc6125bis/pull/34 If anyone > has issues or problems with GitHub, let me know and I’ll email it to you. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Uta mailing list > Uta@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta >
_______________________________________________ Uta mailing list Uta@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
