Subject: [Techspec] pubreq-01 comment or two

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 05:04:00 +0200 (EET)

Just re-read this.  My earlier opinion on the permanent identifier stands;
we should rather try to figure out how to turn the crank sufficiently fast
that these would not be needed.

One comment on early copy editing experiment: we need to involve 
documents which go through heavy editing after WGLC, IETF LC or IESG 
review to get a grip how the RFC-editor would handle these cases (if 
copy edits would be done prior to WGLC).  While the time spent on 
AUTH48 could be minimized, the total time RFC-editor would have to 
spend on a document could get much larger (would RFC-editor just be 
happy with rechecking the diffs after the changes?)

There were a couple of dozen typos etc. which I can send if it's believed to
be worth the effort.

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

_______________________________________________
Techspec mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/techspec