Hi Alexey,
Many thanks for the review and going through the issues that you found, the
corrections for which I believe made the document considerably less bad.
Regarding the issue you mentioned below, it is another very valid point. I
don’t think that the first change I made was sufficiently
On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 9:28 AM Alexey Melnikov wrote:
>
> Hi Douglas,
>
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2020, at 8:28 PM, Douglas Gash (dcmgash) wrote:
> > 5) KRB5 and KRB4 need normative references.
> > TA> The KRB5 and KRB4 are not specifically used in this document,
> > rather, there is one field with
Hi Douglas,
On Mon, Jan 27, 2020, at 8:28 PM, Douglas Gash (dcmgash) wrote:
> 5) KRB5 and KRB4 need normative references.
> TA> The KRB5 and KRB4 are not specifically used in this document,
> rather, there is one field with an option that the client uses to
> indicate how it authenticated,
On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 10:49 AM Alexey Melnikov wrote:
>
> Hi Warren,
> I am getting to the bottom of my ToDo list, so I should be getting to this
> soon.
Any updates? Your DISCUSS is from 2019-05-16 for version -13, and the
document is now at version -17.
I'd dearly love to get this shipped,
Hi there Alexey,
Just a note that Roman has cleared his DISCUSS (with the comment
"Thanks for addressing my DISCUSS and COMMENT points; and finding a
middle ground in this draft by documenting the as-is, but highlight
the issues.")
I'm sorry to be pushy, but the authors have done a lot of work on
> On Feb 13, 2020, at 10:48, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
>
> Hi Warren,
> I am getting to the bottom of my ToDo list, so I should be getting to this
> soon.
Thanks, Alexey.
Joe
___
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
Hi Warren,
I am getting to the bottom of my ToDo list, so I should be getting to this soon.
Best Regards,
Alexey
On Thu, Feb 6, 2020, at 4:04 PM, Warren Kumari wrote:
> Hey Alexey,
>
> I recently took over this document from Igans - it has been stuck in
> 'IESG Evaluation::AD Followup' for 266
Hey Alexey,
I recently took over this document from Igans - it has been stuck in
'IESG Evaluation::AD Followup' for 266 days (at version -13).
This is an informational document, describing an existing, and widely
deployed protocol -- the intent was that, once this is published,
there would be a
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
Many thanks for the comments.
Please see responses from authors inline, marked “TA”. Action items from this
mail to update the document are marked: [AI-TA] to mean: “action item for the
authors”.
On 16/05/2019, 7:21, "Alexey Melnikov via Datatracker" wrote:
Alexey Melnikov has entered
Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-opsawg-tacacs-13: Discuss
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please refer to
Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-opsawg-tacacs-13: Discuss
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please refer to
12 matches
Mail list logo
