On 2/11/15 1:21 PM, Pete Resnick wrote:
Looking through this rev, I only see three minor points brought up by
reviewers that don't appear (to me) to have been directly addressed:
- It was suggested that the document should updates RFC 5246 and RFC 6347.
Personally I think that would be fine - I'm curious what the UTA WG
chairs and sponsoring AD (and perhaps TLS WG chairs) think about it.
- At the end of 7.5, it wasn't clear what "foregoing" referred to.
That entire section - there is no (need for) certificate revocation in DANE.
- It was suggested that an Informative/Normative references scrub take
place. (-prohibiting-rc4 was moved to Normative, but otherwise
everything else remained where it was.)
The authors didn't see a need to move any other references.
I'm comfortable putting this on the IESG agenda in its current form, and
can simply note these items in my ballot. If the editors or the shepherd
wish me to hold off, let me know in the next 24 hours.
As you wish. :-)
Peter
--
Peter Saint-Andre
https://andyet.com/
_______________________________________________
Uta mailing list
Uta@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
