Thanks for the review.Our plan was to publish the problem statement now, but let the requirements, which includes the taxonomy, be the living document, waiting for the bitter end...
On Aug 3, 2009, at 6:59 AM, Sean Turner wrote:
I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviewerfor this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html). Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Document: draft-ietf-alto-problem-statement-02.txt Reviewer: Sean Turner Review Date: 2008-08-02 IETF LC End Date: 2009-08-04 IESG Telechat date: N/ASummary: This document is ready for publication as an Informational RFC.The one question in my mind is whether this should proceed now or remain a living document and become final at the end? Is ALTO going to redo this document if they decide to expand their scope?spt
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
