[dnsext] [WGLC: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-bis-updates-16]
bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com Wed, 01 February 2012 12:27 UTC
Return-Path: <dnsext-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: namedroppers-archive-gleetwall6@lists.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-namedroppers-archive-gleetwall6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8329721F85E5; Wed, 1 Feb 2012 04:27:12 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1328099232; bh=72RoYQZR1LkQ7MgNyodZVL4KL6Ae0R0k85T0dO5qhkA=; h=Date:From:To:Message-ID:Mime-Version:Subject:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Sender; b=DUOqalxTkwDxDuaeXHAl3ll/GhFYdWbU/Hu7kjOtqVu9oIdg3V/NAOV1a/pHnexMS mwcEQ7KKUTYDyDGt0gIR8FFn6S3SVZxwhDkd/ggMjeWBD+7eqIO4I2EXpRnkKjf4/Q OalFGf711qTN1ADN0GFjFdvuMV9Egfd52UrxURWs=
X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A45E21F85E6 for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Feb 2012 04:27:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.466
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.466 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.133, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9LF27D-bt+oy for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Feb 2012 04:27:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from vacation.karoshi.com (vacation.karoshi.com [198.32.6.68]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B05221F85E5 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Feb 2012 04:27:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from karoshi.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by vacation.karoshi.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id q11CRAFB009124 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Feb 2012 12:27:10 GMT
Received: (from bmanning@localhost) by karoshi.com (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id q11CRAdQ009123 for dnsext@ietf.org; Wed, 1 Feb 2012 12:27:10 GMT
Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2012 12:27:10 +0000
From: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com
To: dnsext@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20120201122710.GA9117@vacation.karoshi.com.>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
Subject: [dnsext] [WGLC: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-bis-updates-16]
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org
I have read the document and support its publication. /bill At 12:49 AM 1/20/2012, Andrew Sullivan wrote: >Dear colleagues, > >This message initiates a three week Working Group Last Call on the >document draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-bis-updates-16. LC will close on >2012-01-11 at 00:00 UTC. > >The WG's standard conventions, which require five reviewers who state >that they have read the draft and support its publication as a >necessary but not sufficient determinant of rough consensus, are in >force. Please review the document and post to the list any comments >you have before the close of LC. If you cannot meet that deadline, >but are willing to commit to completing a review and can give me a >firm date for it (and that date is within a reasonable horizon), I >will announce an extension of the LC deadline. I'd appreciate it if >you'd tell me of this need sooner rather than later. Specific >comments are much better than generic ones, and specific comments with >suggested text (if you find some text wanting) are particularly >encouraged. > >Speaking only personally, this draft is the product of several years >of WG work: the -00 of the draft was submitted in 2005. Moreover, it >is the product of a lot of heated discussion and careful teasing out >of the issues involved. I would be sad to discover that we could not >find (rather) more than five reviewers for this document. > >I will be the shepherd for this document if it is sent to the IESG. > >Best regards, > >Andrew _______________________________________________ dnsext mailing list dnsext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext