Thanks Michael. That sounds like you are covering my concerns quite
effectively.
On the IDevID reference, all I think is needed is to change the IEEE
reference to be normative instead of informative. (Or if Toerless'
suggestion is effective in your view, change the text to say that IDevID
is
At this point I think we understand each other's points, and I will wait
for Michael to comment as pen-holder.
Thank you for the prompt response and discussion.
Yours,
Joel
PS: While I sympathize with your reaction to paying for standards from
other SDOs, that is not what determines whether we
On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 10:12:37AM -0400, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
> > Imho, the reference model text is correct. Just like in the non-autonomic
> > input (third bullet item), this vendor-redirect/cloud-registrar would
> > lead to an automatically set up remote ACP peer thats enterred into the
> >
I await Michael's comments. A few in line responses (marked
where I think I may have been misunderstood. I have trimmed the rest.
As noted in the elided text, these are all concerned with clarity.
Yours,
Joel
On 8/10/18 1:10 AM, Toerless Eckert wrote:
On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at
Reviewer: Joel Halpern
Review result: Ready with Issues
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.
For
