[mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
l.w...@surrey.ac.uk
Sent: 03 June 2013 02:52
To: brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com; ietf@ietf.org
Subject: RE: I-D Action: draft-crocker-id-adoption-02.txt
I'd argue that the draft also needs to discuss IRTF processes, such as they
are.
though the IRTF groups
On 6/3/2013 1:27 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
My main negative comment is that although the draft says it's not a
formal process document, its language in many places belies that.
For example:
...
I'd suggest a careful pass through the text, removing instances
of words like process, formal and
Hi,
My main positive comment is that it's a good idea to document guidelines
in this area, and that (viewed as guidelines) I largely agree with
the draft.
My main negative comment is that although the draft says it's not a
formal process document, its language in many places belies that.
For
...@gmail.com]
Sent: 03 June 2013 00:27
To: IETF discussion list
Subject: Re: I-D Action: draft-crocker-id-adoption-02.txt
Hi,
My main positive comment is that it's a good idea to document guidelines
in this area, and that (viewed as guidelines) I largely agree with
the draft.
My main negative comment
