Ted, the specific comment here is w.r.t. a statement in the IANA considerations that reads "The prefix that was temporarily allocated for the experimental ORCHID is to be returned to IANA in 2014 [RFC4843]."
Do we really need an update of the draft for the sake of "s/is to be/was/"? --julien On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 8:43 AM, Ted Lemon <[email protected]> wrote: > On Jun 19, 2014, at 10:24 AM, Julien Laganier <[email protected]> wrote: >> This provides useful information on the need for an allocation for >> the time being, and I believe can be edited as you suggest as an >> editorial change during AUTH48 once the draft has been approved by >> IESG. > > SM, are you satisfied with Julien's response? > > Julien, I'd prefer that you update the draft--it would be highly unusual to > address IETF last call comments during AUTH48. > _______________________________________________ Hipsec mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec
