Return-Path: <jeremyrand@airmail.cc>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57791129C48
 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri,  3 Feb 2017 07:34:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5
 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
 DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001,
 URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
 header.d=airmail.cc
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44])
 by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id IuIZX62UqlMn for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>;
 Fri,  3 Feb 2017 07:34:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cock.li (cock.li [185.100.85.212])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5B7C0129C41
 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri,  3 Feb 2017 07:34:39 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=airmail.cc; s=mail;
 t=1486136076; bh=ZDveUHkAMLvMRWvgMGRyPr+UbtamxftCkvHYWzuRfrM=;
 h=Reply-To:Subject:References:To:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From;
 b=Pd/TA7OfvuQJw2nEZWJV4yNj9bOi/oAj1cTDjjIEYYRl3kppjoUxKt9YjLCYo5LGd
 ATj6j1PTYi/+eBgAvj6tbd1t0KOFQUsVe1RAO5iGFsQnIXVAM8zqgdEUSKRxoAO9rW
 /4CPS8mHnXaCBb1IGZCQ74yS7uuEepnV/8qVhs0ZqTlh7ehZY6+feYXy7kIwXgJ5N8
 PFyzq/mzXpmE7SJDfGYraV0mjR70Z0zBSzwSKozjAgfsCJXeako6ZDbeHS11eTNNHS
 wvbs6arNoUb5QSvfnQrWLx4HW8RH4wgdhYFxASRKBBK8SyiSi41Eaq34eS4Ev5RPK5
 u3RBlFA6xeQsA==
References: <6545B2F1-15C6-41F6-ABF0-2D3E6983F4AB@gmail.com>
To: dnsop@ietf.org
From: Jeremy Rand <jeremyrand@airmail.cc>
Message-ID: <f660f4dd-02f0-dfa6-aa76-1632d08bc668@airmail.cc>
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 15:34:41 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <6545B2F1-15C6-41F6-ABF0-2D3E6983F4AB@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
 protocol="application/pgp-signature";
 boundary="oIVVcE56QUnAnKdESWA7GOtwujd1FO1aV"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/7LamPXibZYwD0h9BgO61Iionn-8>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] WGLC for draft-ietf-dnsop-sutld-ps
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
Reply-To: jeremy@veclabs.net
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>,
 <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>,
 <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2017 15:34:46 -0000

This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
--oIVVcE56QUnAnKdESWA7GOtwujd1FO1aV
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Suzanne Woolf:
> This message opens a Working Group Last Call for:
>=20
> "Special-Use Names Problem Statement"
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-sutld-ps/ <https://da=
tatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-sutld-ps/>
> Proposed status: informational
>=20
> Starts: 2 Feb. 2017
> Ends: 23 Feb. 2017 (3 weeks)
>=20
> Discussion should go to the mailing list.=20
>=20
> Is this draft ready to advance for publication as an Informational RFC,=
 and as guidance for possible updates to RFC 6761? Does it describe the r=
elevant issues clearly, and cover all the relevant ones that should be ta=
ken into account in future work in the IETF on the special use names regi=
stry or RFC 6761?
>=20
> If not, can you suggest changes that would get your support for advanci=
ng it? (=93Send text=94 if possible!)
>=20
>=20
> thanks,
> Suzanne & Tim

Trivial spelling nit: Sec. 4.2.2 says "unilateral use by the TOR
project".  The correct spelling is "Tor" (only the "T" in "Tor" should
be capitalized.)  Also, according to
https://www.torproject.org/docs/trademark-faq.html.en, "The Tor Project"
is the correct spelling of the phrase (all 3 words should have the
initial letter capitalized).

Cheers,
-Jeremy


--oIVVcE56QUnAnKdESWA7GOtwujd1FO1aV
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=m31w
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--oIVVcE56QUnAnKdESWA7GOtwujd1FO1aV--

