Dear colleagues, On Tue, Jul 24, 2007 at 10:21:22PM -0400, Andrew Sullivan wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > Stephane Bortzmeyer pointed out to me this morning a problem in what > section 2.1 of the -04 draft says. Here's how it reads now:
[. . .] As there have been no additional comments in this thread (which starts at <http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsop/current/msg05621.html>), I updated the document and (just now) submitted the draft, including the text suggested by John Dickinson. I did _not_ include any remarks about RFC 2505 as suggested by John Schnizlein, because nobody else argued in favour of it as I asked in <http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsop/current/msg05617.html>. I believe this update completes the work agreed to at the Chicago meeting. If you read the draft (after it hits the repository) and disagree, your editors would very much appreciate hearing as much. Thanks for your continued attention to this draft. Best regards, Andrew -- Andrew Sullivan 204-4141 Yonge Street Afilias Canada Toronto, Ontario Canada <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> M2P 2A8 jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1 416 646 3304 x4110 _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
