[Pals] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-pals-rfc4447bis-05: (with COMMENT)

"Mirja Kuehlewind" <ietf@kuehlewind.net> Mon, 19 September 2016 10:40 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Mirja Kuehlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <147428161938.31192.3289753462442404555.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 03:40:19 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pals/77v5Pi9-TdgjDO5BJYRUMhVDdaU>
Cc: stewart.bryant@gmail.com, draft-ietf-pals-rfc4447bis.all@ietf.org, draft-ietf-pals-rfc4447bis@ietf.org, pals-chairs@ietf.org, pals@ietf.org
Subject: [Pals] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-pals-rfc4447bis-05: (with COMMENT)

Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-pals-rfc4447bis-05: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pals-rfc4447bis/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

This doc obsoletes RFC6723. RFC6723 upadtes RFC6073 but this doc doesn't.
Is that correct?

[Pals] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ie… Mirja Kuehlewind