The shepherd's write-up has been updated to align with the draft.
Brian
On 8/5/23 2:01 AM, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) wrote:
Hello Paul,
Thanks for your reply, look below for EV2> but, in short, we are all set
*except* for the shepherd's write-up .
Regards
-éric
On 05/08/2023, 02:53, "Paul
Hello Paul,
Thanks for your reply, look below for EV2> but, in short, we are all set
*except* for the shepherd's write-up .
Regards
-éric
On 05/08/2023, 02:53, "Paul Hoffman" mailto:paul.hoff...@icann.org>> wrote:
On Jul 31, 2023, at 8:29 AM, Eric Vyncke (evyncke)
On Jul 31, 2023, at 8:29 AM, Eric Vyncke (evyncke)
wrote:
> # Shepherd's write-ip
>
>
> The shepherd's write-up states "the WG would like to ensure that this list
> remains in the document once it is published as an RFC" but the appendix A
> states "RFC Editor: please remove this section
On Aug 1, 2023, at 16:37, Brian Haberman wrote:
>
>
> As document shepherd...
>
>> Paul Wouters pointed out on the list (2023-07-02) that Appendix A is not in
>> the format from RFC 7942, and is not at all definitive, and thus can be
>> removed.
>
> I got the sense that the WG wanted
Hey Paul,
As document shepherd...
On 7/21/23 2:56 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
Substantial bits below; others were accepted withtout note.
On Jul 17, 2023, at 5:06 AM, Eric Vyncke (evyncke)
wrote:
# Shepherd's write-ip
The shepherd's write-up states "the WG would like to ensure that this
Thank you, Paul, Joey, Daniel, for the -10.
As you can guess, I won't have time to review the -10 and the email thread
before next week __
Regards
-éric
On 27/07/2023, 08:18, "Paul Hoffman" mailto:paul.hoff...@icann.org>> wrote:
Please see the -10 that was just submitted. Let us know if we
Please see the -10 that was just submitted. Let us know if we need to make more
changes before you want to move this on to IETF Last Call.
--Paul Hoffman (for dkg and Joey as well)
___
dns-privacy mailing list
dns-privacy@ietf.org
On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 3:27 PM Christian Huitema
wrote:
>
> IF we were serious about the "informational only" status, then we would
> [...]
>
Disagree. Non-standards track RFCs can have these requirements. For
example, they may be documents never intended for the standards track (in
that they
On 7/21/2023 11:56 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
Substantial bits below; others were accepted withtout note.
On Jul 17, 2023, at 5:06 AM, Eric Vyncke (evyncke)
wrote:
# Shepherd's write-ip
The shepherd's write-up states "the WG would like to ensure that this list remains in the
document once
Substantial bits below; others were accepted withtout note.
On Jul 17, 2023, at 5:06 AM, Eric Vyncke (evyncke)
wrote:
> # Shepherd's write-ip
>
> The shepherd's write-up states "the WG would like to ensure that this list
> remains in the document once it is published as an RFC" but the
10 matches
Mail list logo
