Go ahead Rob, Thanks
Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 2, 2019, at 14:49, Rob Stradling <[email protected]> wrote: > > Paul, Melinda, > > May I go ahead and merge > https://github.com/google/certificate-transparency-rfcs/pull/313? > > James (via a private message) and Andrew have both given it the thumbs up, > but it's still not clear to me what the 6962-bis authors can or can't do at > this point in the editing cycle. > > Thanks. > > From: Andrew Ayer <[email protected]> > Sent: 24 September 2019 19:15 > To: Rob Stradling <[email protected]> > Cc: Manger, James <[email protected]>; [email protected] > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Trans] draft-ietf-trans-rfc6962-bis-33: base URL vs <log server> > > On Tue, 24 Sep 2019 10:20:46 +0000 > Rob Stradling <[email protected]> wrote: > > > [Chairs: Given the stage we're at with this document, please could I > > ask you to confirm whether or not we may adopt James's editorial > > suggestions?] > > > > On 20/09/2019 03:17, Manger, James wrote: > > > Editorial suggestions for draft-ietf-trans-rfc6962-bis. > > > > James: Thanks! I think your editorial suggestions add clarity. > > > > Here's a PR: > > https://github.com/google/certificate-transparency-rfcs/pull/313 > > This is a good change. With RFC6962, some implementations include > "https://"; when addressing logs and others don't. This change > makes clear that "https://"; should be included. > > Regards, > Andrew > _______________________________________________ > Trans mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans
_______________________________________________ Trans mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans
