Re: CAP-12 - interm version 'A'

[email protected] wrote:

> 
> Bruce, thanks for taking the trouble to do the diff.  And, thank you for
> sending me a copy of the entire diff document.  I've put it out on the
> following link so people can read it - I understand it was too big to go
> through the email engine at imc.org.  I don't have a problem hosting it on
> my site. The link is http://www.egenconsulting.com/ietf/Diff-10-12a.txt

Thanks.

> In one of your comments below, you said Doug changed the footer to be
> Royer, et al.  In searching through IETF archives of RFC's and drafts, it
> appears there is a precedent for doing that when there are more names than
> will fit on one footer line.  I'm not sure that's the case on this draft,
> but I leave that up to the other authors to "yell and scream" if their
> names only appear at the top of the draft and not on every line.  Either
> way is "Ok" according to the RFC that details how to set up RFC's.

The tool takes them out, I plan to manually hack them back in for
the final RFC - and thanks for your support!

> As for the boiler plate changes, I think a boiler plate is supposed to be
> just that - I am not sure we have much leverage to change things.  However,
> I must admit I don't know if the boiler plate has recently changed.  I will
> be looking into that as we speak.

See my other post on the above issue. Hint - compare the text
and not the formatting of the text. NOTHING CHANGED except
the formatting as mandated by the IETF.

> And finally, I'm not sure your "colors" came across.  For security reasons
> I have turned off allowing HTML in incoming emails and other's may have as
> well.

What Bruce posted came to me as a LARGE JPG looking object that was
unreadable. I assumed it was an error. Perhaps it requires a vendor
specific tool that I did not have to view.

AND - Bruce's diff - as I can see it from your web page (thanks again),
is a diff from (-10) to (-12a) (not from -11 to -12a and not a diff
of -10 to -11).

So PLEASE BE SURE the issue was not already covered before posting !!!

And many of the bugs/fixes where covered in the few bugs filed
(of which had many entries):

I track many of the issues with the MOZILLA/BUGZILLA tool:

	http://INET-Consulting.com/bugzilla

	IETF Drafts and RFCs / draft-ietf-calsch-cap

> Bruce said:
> 
> Doug wrote on 08/30/2003 03:48:52 PM:
> 
>>I have placed the latest edit of CAP for your review at:
>>
>>? ?http://inet-consulting.com/draft-ietf-calsch-cap-12-a.txt

-- 

 Doug Royer                     |   http://INET-Consulting.com
 -------------------------------|-----------------------------
 [email protected]                 | Office: (208)612-INET
 http://Royer.com/People/Doug   |    Fax: (866)594-8574
                                |   Cell: (208)520-4044

                We Do Standards - You Need Standards