Jeff and Russ: 

Thank you for detailed "Nits".  We'll post another draft on 4/4/2016. 

Sue 

-----Original Message-----
From: Jeffrey Haas [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2016 9:08 PM
To: Susan Hares
Cc: [email protected]; 'Daniel Migault'; 'Joel M. Halpern'; 'Alia Atlas'
Subject: Re: [i2rs] 2 week WG last call on
draft-ietf-i2rs-security-environment-reqs - WG LC 3/17 to 4/7

On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 09:39:45AM -0400, Susan Hares wrote:
> We have not received any input on the
> draft-ietf-i2rs-security-environment-reqs document.  The security 
> environments is part of the package of requirements, the WG chairs 
> wish to send to the IESG.
> 
> Please take time to review  this document prior to IETF, and send 
> comments to the list including whether it is ready for publication.

I have reviewed draft-ietf-i2rs-protocol-security-requirements-03.  It
addresses the comments formerly given as part of my shepherd review.

(The shepherd report is here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-i2rs-protocol-security-requireme
nts/shepherdwriteup/)

I noted in my review of -03 that there are a few spelling nits that should
be addressed before a request for publication.  Russ White, however, did a
much more thorough review than I did and in two messages recently to the
list gave some suggested edits:

https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/i2rs/4ES9UUPEUQ4kSAnL7-riShMJee8
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/i2rs/P6QZNAidn5Azye1dNAOTtxt_BuA

I would suggest to the authors to do a quick update and once these edits are
complete we can send the document to the IESG.

The pending edits do not impact my prior shepherd report.

-- Jeff

_______________________________________________
i2rs mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs

Reply via email to