Re: WG Last Call on SUA Implementors Guide completes

Lode,

Aside from the other problems with the document, were you intending on
ever completing section 2.7?  Or did we want this incomplete section
going into an RFC?  Did anyone read and reread this section?

> >" 2.7.2  Text changes to the document
> >" 
> >"    ---------
> >"    Old text: (Section x.x)
> >"    ---------
> >" 
> >" 
> >"    ---------
> >"    New text: (Section x.x)
> >"    ---------

As to my process question: there would have been little point in giving
the document a careful review if the intention was to edit an rfc3868bis
document.  Sections such as Section 2.7 would either disappear or be
edited into the "bis" document correctly.  That is why I asked the
question a month ago.

As the intention is to have this document stand as an RFC on its own,
the document should be properly completed and receive a complete review.

Lyndon, would it be possible to extend the WGLC period by several weeks
to allow time to detail the issues with the document considering that
the intention to publish the document as an RFC on its own was only just
announced?

--brian

Coene, Lode wrote:                            (Tue, 12 Dec 2006 12:15:35)
> This document is in its 5th iteration. 
> It has some changes on some of the points you mentioned(and probably not
> to your liking)  
> That means that it has been read and reread... I think that this means
> that it has been reviewed...
> 
> This document is ready for AD review...
> 

-- 
Brian F. G. Bidulock
[email protected]
http://www.openss7.org/