I can confirm both the desire to improve the doc, as well as being buried under 
things.

C


___________________________________________
Colin Doyle
Juniper Networks | Senior Systems Engineer
C. 503.810.2129 | E. [email protected]



On 5/20/20, 11:24 AM, "Joe Clarke (jclarke)" <[email protected]> wrote:

    [External Email. Be cautious of content]


    > On May 20, 2020, at 11:50, Michael Richardson <[email protected]> 
wrote:
    >
    >
    > Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker <[email protected]> wrote:
    >> The shepherd writeup contains this remark, which made me squint a bit:
    >> "More security review was asked for by the WG at various [times], and
    >> it is not clear that this input will be taken into account."  Why's
    >> that?
    >
    > When I did the review of comments, there were a few comments/threads
    > in the archives which did not clearly have a followup action/commit/diff.
    > I am not sure if the WG decided that the comments were not relevant, or if
    > changes were made but not acknowledged.  I don't know if the commenters
    > are happy with the result, or still waiting for a response.

    I think at times in the email exchanges, the authors might have been buried 
under other things.  That said, I don’t think they have outright ignored any 
comments at this point.  Either they’ve been addressed, discussed, or are going 
to be addressed.  I have the impression the authors are very keen on taking 
comments and improving the doc.

    Joe



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

Reply via email to