Hi Adam, We believe the latest version which included the change of registries from Expert Review to Specification Required resolves all your COMMENTs. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-trans-rfc6962-bis-40#section-10 Earlier updates had already fixed the boiler plate to use RFC 8174 text and the use of "we have established". Please let us know if you feel your COMMENTs have not been fully addressed. Paul _______________________________________________ Trans mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans
- Re: [Trans] Martin Duke's No Objection on draft-ietf-trans... Martin Duke
- Re: [Trans] Martin Duke's No Objection on draft-ietf-trans... Ryan Sleevi
- Re: [Trans] Martin Duke's No Objection on draft-ietf-... Martin Duke
- Re: [Trans] Martin Duke's No Objection on draft-i... Ryan Sleevi
- Re: [Trans] Martin Duke's No Objection on dra... Paul Wouters
- Re: [Trans] Martin Duke's No Objection on draft-i... Salz, Rich
- Re: [Trans] Martin Duke's No Objection on dra... Alexey Melnikov
- Re: [Trans] Martin Duke's No Objection on dra... Martin Duke
- Re: [Trans] Martin Duke's No Objection on dra... Salz, Rich
- [Trans] Alexey Melnikov's DISCUSS on draft-ie... Paul Wouters
- Re: [Trans] Adam Roach's COMMENT on draft-iet... Paul Wouters
- Re: [Trans] Martin Duke's No Objection on dra... Ryan Sleevi
