This is probably my fault. I didn't think it was wise to submit a
new version of the I-D until all of the comments & corrections had
been collected. I didn't want folks trying to review a moving target,
especially since a change in paragraph A might affect the interpretation
of paragraph B.
----------------+--------------------------------------------------
Kevin M. Igoe | "We can't solve problems by using the same kind
kmi...@nsa.gov | of thinking we used when we created them."
| - Albert Einstein -
----------------+--------------------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: Jari Arkko [mailto:jari.ar...@piuha.net]
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2014 5:20 AM
To: Ben Campbell; Igoe, Kevin M.
Cc: gen-art@ietf.org Team (gen-art@ietf.org);
draft-ietf-avtcore-srtp-aes-gcm....@tools.ietf.org; IETF Discussion
Subject: Re: Gen-ART LC Review of draft-ietf-avtcore-srtp-aes-gcm-14
I am looking at this draft in order to fill in my recommendations for tonight's
IESG telechat.
Ben, thank you for your review which pointed out worries (and I agreed with
those), and thank you Kevin for the responses (which made sense to me).
However, in addition to the major/minor issue discussion, there were several
suggested edits. Is there a plan to add them to a new version? I don't see a
new draft version available yet... didn't see anything that is critical, but I
also didn't want to us to lose discussed improvements.
Jari
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
