Many thanks for the comments. Please see responses from authors inline, marked “TA”. Action items from this mail to update the document are marked: [AI-TA] to mean: “action item for the authors”.
On 14/05/2019, 17:33, "Deborah Brungard via Datatracker" <[email protected]> wrote: Deborah Brungard has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-opsawg-tacacs-13: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-tacacs/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- While the status is an Informational document, not PS, I still would prefer if earlier in the document it provided the reader with deployment concerns e.g. the introduction. TA> Agreed, we will add a summary of section 10 to the introduction [AI-TA] The current introduction states a "wide range" of clients and servers are already deployed. Not until section 10 is the reader informed "Multiple implementations of the protocol described in the original TACACS+ Draft `The Draft' [TheDraft] have been deployed. As the protocol was never standardized, current implementations may be incompatible in non-obvious ways". And section 10.5 on Best Practices which has the new restriction that it not be deployed with other traffic. This information is needed much earlier in the document to give context for the reader. TA> Agreed, we will augment the introduction as advised [AI-TA] _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
