Deb Cooley via Datatracker <[email protected]> writes: > Section 1.1: The text in this section is not what I expected in a section > titled 'document audience'...Is this draft for implementers? operators? My > suggestions: move para 1 and 3 (both can go back into Section 1), put para 5 > first, and combine para 2 and 4. I will note that this suggestion is to > improve readability.
Thinking about this one still.... seems scary to change that much text and layout that already had consensus from the WG especially and the IETF as a whole. > Section 4: What do the '[*]' mean? Fixed by removing them (see comments to Med). > *Section 5: Providing a direct quote from RFC8624 is fine, but then the quote > needs to be enclosed in "". And then the authors can't make changes to it, > because that makes it a paraphrase, not a quote. My opinion, providing the > quote/paraphrase here makes future work harder - harder to keep future drafts > in sync. My recommendation is to delete the last three paragraphs and the > last > phrase of the first paragraph ',which we quote below'. 8624 obsoletes the other, so we do want to reproduce it rather than reference it. So we changed it to: This document makes no modifications to the security of the existing protocol or recommendations described in [RFC8624]. Thus, the security considerations remain the same. The remainder of this section restates that document's text. -- Wes Hardaker My Games: https://frostedaxe.com/ My Pictures: http://photos.capturedonearth.com/ _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
