Russ Housley <housley at vigilsec dot com> wrote:
My preference would be for the Trust to approve the revised TLP that
have not received any negative comments, and thus release the
documents in the RFC Editor queue. Then, the Trust should put forward
alternative text for the sections that have received negative
comments, starting another review period.
So there will likely be yet another revision of the TLP text? That
means the already-overworked volunteer tool developers will have to add
another option to generate new boilerplate, and I-D authors will endure
another round of idnits telling them their boilerplate is out of date.
--
Doug Ewell * Thornton, Colorado, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14
http://www.ewellic.org
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages ˆ
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf