Murray Kucherawy has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-acme-authority-token-tnauthlist-10: 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/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-acme-authority-token-tnauthlist/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thank you to Sean Turner for the ARTART review. I support Francesca's DISCUSS. The shepherd writeup appears to be confused with the one for draft-ietf-acme-authority-token. This one has the abstract for that one, for example. Thanks for addressing my DISCUSS position. However, the paragraph containing the new reference to RFC 4686 seems a bit jumbled. You might want to take another run at it before sending it to the RFC Editor. _______________________________________________ Acme mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
