Hi Michael,
> > All three original authors were asked to co-author the draft. Tommy
> > agreed, but no reply was received from Samy and Ravi. I cannot judge
> > their contribution to the original rfc, but I think that it's a good
> > idea to add them to acknowledgement section an
Valery Smyslov wrote:
>> I wonder about keeping more of the original authors on the new
>> document, since it is substantively the same document. I can not
>> judge what their contribution was to the original document, nor do I
>> know if they were asked. If the design team has
Hi Michael,
> I have reviewed the diff at:
> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=rfc8229&url2=draft-ietf-ipsecme-
> rfc8229bis-01
>
> and the update seems like a good job to me.
Thanks.
> I wonder about keeping more of the original authors on the new document,
> since it is substantively the sa
I have reviewed the diff at:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=rfc8229&url2=draft-ietf-ipsecme-rfc8229bis-01
and the update seems like a good job to me.
I wonder about keeping more of the original authors on the new document,
since it is substantively the same document. I can not judge what
This is the start of 2 week WGLC on the draft-ietf-ipsecme-rfc8229bis
document, ending 2021-11-26.
Please submit your comments to the list, also send a note if you have
reviewed the document, so we can see how many people are interested in
getting this out.
--
kivi...@iki.fi
