On Feb 17, 2023, at 3:29 PM, Robert Sparks via Datatracker
wrote:
> Nit: The discussion in paragraph 3 of section 3 and the note that follows are
> currently ambiguous. When it calls out that 2865 limits the size of DHCP
> options and that 7499 and 7930 relaxes the limit, is it only trying to
Dear Bernie Volz and Tomek Mrugalski (cc: opsawg WG),
As the designated experts for the RADIUS Attributes Permitted in DHCPv6 RADIUS
Option registry, can you review the proposed registration in
draft-ietf-opsawg-add-encrypted-dns for us? Please see:
Reviewer: Robert Sparks
Review result: Ready with Issues
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.
For
Sorry for late follow up. Thank you very much for the valuable comments, they
have been incorporated into the -01 version
(https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ma-opsawg-ucl-acl-01.txt). And the
steps have also been updated as you proposed accordingly.
[JMC] Thanks. As stated, this flow
Hi Bo,
Could you please elaborate on your note?
>From your email:
Regarding licenses (or entitlements in draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-09), some
licenses may affect the functions of physical components or software
components, though having removed from the current model, but we feel further
