Hi Vijay,
The recent update below includes changes to address your comments.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-flex-algo-10
Thanks,
Ketan
On Sun, Aug 14, 2022 at 7:00 AM Vijay Gurbani
wrote:
> Dear Ketan: Sounds good. Thank you for your time attending to my
Hi all,
The following reviewers have assignments:
For telechat 2022-08-25
Reviewer Type LC end Draft
Christer Holmberg Last Call 2022-07-21
draft-ietf-tsvwg-aqm-dualq-coupled-24
Pete Resnick Last Call 2022-07-21 draft-ietf-tsvwg-l4s-arch-19
Last calls:
On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 2:33 PM Patrik Fältström wrote:
> On 18 Aug 2022, at 14:31, Gould, James wrote:
>
> > By creating a standard around draft-ietf-regext-epp-eai it should
> decrease diversity of proprietary extensions with adding EAI support to EPP.
>
> Indeed it will, as long as the
On 18 Aug 2022, at 14:31, Gould, James wrote:
> By creating a standard around draft-ietf-regext-epp-eai it should decrease
> diversity of proprietary extensions with adding EAI support to EPP.
Indeed it will, as long as the specification on how to do it is stringent
enough. I just wanted to
Partrik,
By creating a standard around draft-ietf-regext-epp-eai it should decrease
diversity of proprietary extensions with adding EAI support to EPP.
--
JG
James Gould
Fellow Engineer
jgo...@verisign.com
703-948-3271
12061 Bluemont Way
Reston, VA 20190
Verisign.com
Dear Patrik,
On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 2:23 PM Patrik Fältström wrote:
> On 18 Aug 2022, at 14:14, Dmitry Belyavsky wrote:
>
> > If we try to provide uniform requirements, I'm not sure we should do it
> via preventing/limiting usage of non-ASCII email, speaking about this case.
>
> I am not
On 18 Aug 2022, at 14:14, Dmitry Belyavsky wrote:
> If we try to provide uniform requirements, I'm not sure we should do it via
> preventing/limiting usage of non-ASCII email, speaking about this case.
I am not saying we should prevent it. I want the specification of how to do it
be so well
+1, I agree with the points that Dmitry has made. I will add that we need to
ensure that draft-ietf-regext-epp-eai is strictly focused on the interaction
between the registrar and the registry, which is why the statements in question
needed to be removed. EPP is the IETF standard protocol
Dear Patrik,
Many thanks for your letter!
see my answers below.
On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 10:10 AM Patrik Fältström wrote:
> On 18 Aug 2022, at 7:59, John C Klensin wrote:
>
> > (3) Or if, as I believe one of your recent notes suggested,
> > those alternative addresses are strictly a matter
Dear John,
Many thanks for your letter!
See my response below.
On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 7:59 AM John C Klensin wrote:
> James,
>
> Replying to this note rather that several of the others because
> it most clearly identifies what is being done. I am copying, I
> hope, the relevant review teams.
On 18 Aug 2022, at 7:59, John C Klensin wrote:
> (3) Or if, as I believe one of your recent notes suggested,
> those alternative addresses are strictly a matter between the registrar and
> registrant, that raises two other questions.
> First, if a registrar is in need of the information to
>
11 matches
Mail list logo
