Nico,
The table in the Summary section (section 13) retains the RFC 2119 normative
language, but in the sections the table refers to, the normative keywords were
uncapitalized. Is this intentional? This issue was raised by Alissa Cooper a
few days ago.
Greg
On Jun 10, 2016, at 08:03 AM,
Hi Al,
I believe, we agree here. However, I’m not really sure what needs to be
changed/added in the draft now. The only concrete item I have is replacing
"application-level“ by "transport-layer payload“. Anything else?
Mirja
>
> Am 10.06.2016 um 19:16 schrieb MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)
Dave,
On 02/06/16 17:54, Dave Täht wrote:
On 6/1/16 7:10 AM, Wesley Eddy wrote:
Hello; the AQM list has been mostly quiet recently, other than
discussion around the IESG comments on our drafts as they progress
through the IESG review, so I thought it would be a good time to send a
status
