Hi,
I hope that in the last few versions we have updated the document to
sufficiently answer the concerns raised, please let me know if any concerns
remain, many thanks.
The majority of the issues were responded to initially last summer, but the
balance should be by the latest version
Hi,
I hope that in the last few versions we have updated the document to
sufficiently answer the concerns raised, please let me know if any concerns
remain, many thanks.
The majority of the issues were answered last summer, but the balance should be
by the latest version recently uploaded.
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Operations and Management Area Working Group
WG of the IETF.
Title : The TACACS+ Protocol
Authors : Thorsten Dahm
Andrej
Will do.
On 27/01/2020, 15:42, "Joe Clarke (jclarke)" wrote:
> On Jan 27, 2020, at 10:31, Warren Kumari wrote:
>
> Hi there authors and WG,
>
> I'm now the responsible AD for this document.
>
> There is *significant* history here, and it is going to
> On Jan 27, 2020, at 10:31, Warren Kumari wrote:
>
> Hi there authors and WG,
>
> I'm now the responsible AD for this document.
>
> There is *significant* history here, and it is going to take
> substantial archeology to rebuild the state, etc.
>
> Authors, there are currently 2 open
Hi there authors and WG,
I'm now the responsible AD for this document.
There is *significant* history here, and it is going to take
substantial archeology to rebuild the state, etc.
Authors, there are currently 2 open DISUCSS positions - these
DISCUSSES were opened against version -13 of the
Hi there all,
A quick update - I'm now the responsible AD for this document; chairs
/ WG - this feels very much like an OPSAWG document (PSAMP / IPFIX
have concluded, and much of the work has moved into OpsAWG).
Is there any reason why this **isn't** the best place for this
document to be
