[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Ltru] AD review of draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis-21bis.txt

From: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov at isode.com>
To: Randy Presuhn <randy_presuhn at mindspring.com>
Cc: LTRU Working Group <ltru at ietf.org>
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 20:08:40 +0100
In-reply-to: <000e01c9bad2$d8e11d20$6801a8c0 at oemcomputer>
References: <49E04FF4.1040804 at isode.com> <000e01c9bad2$d8e11d20$6801a8c0 at oemcomputer>

Randy Presuhn wrote:

Hi -

Since our AD has supplied us with a fairly lengthy set of detailed
comments and has kindly numbered them, I'll enter them into the
issue tracker.   Please put yours responses to keep each issue in
a separate thread with an appropriate subject line - it'll make the
job of the editors and the document shepherd *much* easier.

It is probably worth reviewing the list of comments first. Some of themmight be bogus.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [Ltru] AD review of draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis-21bis.txt
  - From: Randy Presuhn

References:
- [Ltru] AD review of draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis-21bis.txt
  - From: Alexey Melnikov
- Re: [Ltru] AD review of draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis-21bis.txt
  - From: Randy Presuhn

Prev by Date: Re: [Ltru] AD review of draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis-21bis.txt
Next by Date: [Ltru] Issue #34 (AD comment #1) - who scrutinizes primary subtags refected by ISO 639/RA-JAC?
Previous by thread: Re: [Ltru] AD review of draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis-21bis.txt
Next by thread: Re: [Ltru] AD review of draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis-21bis.txt
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.