Randy
The process:
If they are just nits, then just tell the editor either
now or in Auth48.
If they are technical errors such as those that would be
excepted under errata - i.e. the intent of the IETF was
clear but the wrong words were put in the draft -
I will sign them off in Auth48.
If
On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 15:43:04 -0800, Randy Bush ra...@psg.com said:
A) It's too early for nit edits
RB not really. as the iesg has approved this one, changes are going to be
RB a process pain. so this message pushes back on some of your suggestions
RB which i would otherwise have gladly
[PPS: I don't expect a response to my just-posted-note since it's really
beyond the point of worth in keeping the discussion going]
--
Wes Hardaker
SPARTA, Inc.
___
sidr mailing list
sidr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
Just finished (finally) scanning the rpki-rtr document (-25 version) and
have a few notes about it. Over all, though, nicely done ID. Thanks!
A) It's too early for nit edits, but this one just jumped at me and I
couldn't ignore it.
5.1, 3rd paragraph(/sentence): is only - is *the* only
A) It's too early for nit edits
not really. as the iesg has approved this one, changes are going to be
a process pain. so this message pushes back on some of your suggestions
which i would otherwise have gladly taken.
perhaps the sponsoring AD will give me/us some guidance in this.
also
