Thanks, both of you. Jari
On 11 May 2015, at 21:49, Brian E Carpenter <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > The -09 version resolves my comments completely, thanks! > > Brian > > On 08/05/2015 12:26, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: >> On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Brian E Carpenter >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> >> It seems the author didn't see my Last Call review, so this review has >> not changed. >> >> >> Nope, I hadn't. Apologies for that. >> >> >> As the writeup says, this is an update to a long document that mainly >> resolves a >> notified erratum and some oversights in the previous version's IANA >> material. >> Therefore I did not review the whole document. As far as I can tell, the >> changes >> reflect the description in the writeup. (I assume that IANA will work >> with the >> author to get the registry updates exactly right.) >> >> >> Yes, that's already happening behind the scenes. >> >> >> Minor Issue: >> ------------ >> >> IMHO the "Change History" section should be summarised in a "Changes >> since RFC7001" >> section (rather than being deleted). >> >> >> Sure, that seems a reasonable suggestion. >> >> Nit: >> ---- >> >> 6.7. SMTP Enhanced Stauts Codes >> >> s/Stauts/Status/ >> >> >> Fixed for next version. >> >> Thanks! >> >> -MSK
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
