Some corrections.

On Feb 12, 2016, at 11:46 AM, Bradner, Scott <[email protected]> wrote:
> The topics of the appeal and other messages from Mr. DeKok included:
> 1/ The adoption of the TACACS+ Internet Draft as a working group item.

  My appeal concerned the *process* of adoption as a WG item.

> 2/ The appropriateness of publishing the TACACS+ Internet Draft as
> a RFC through the IETF track.

  My comments at the time of the appeal show that I support publishing 
historical TACACS+ protocol as an informational RFC, via the OPSAWG

> 3/ The appropriateness of publishing the TACACS+ Internet Draft as
> a standards track RFC.

  My comments at the time of the appeal  show that I support publishing the 
*changed* (i.e. future) TACACS+ as a standards track RFC.

  I do not support publishing the historical TACACS+ protocol as a standards 
track RFC.

> 20 July 2015: The ops area session was held. The TACACS+ slides used
> during the session are at: 
> https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/93/slides/slides-93-opsarea-2.pdf
> 
> Minutes of the session are quite sparse.  They note that the presentation
> occurred and that Alan DeKok objected to the proposal.

  I don't see copy of the minutes on the WG mailing list archives.  They aren't 
on the WG page at:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/opsawg/meetings/

  Alan DeKok.

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

Reply via email to