Subject: RE: ISSUE: definition of RADIUS IPv6 "data types" arbitrary and unjustified

From: "Glen Zorn" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 17:46:28 +0700

Adrian Farrel [mailto:[email-masked]] writes:

> Hi Glen,
> 
> Second of your Issue tracker emails to arrive today. 

And more to come ;-).

> Is there any
> specific
> action you are asking from the IESG, or is this for info?

Yes, I would request the termination of IESG review and return of this
terribly flawed document to the WG.  I realize that it's pretty late in the
process, but it seems clear to me (and I hope, given the content of the
messages you mention above) that, despite all the Last Calls, etc.,  no one
has read this draft really  carefully (I know that I hadn't); that, alone,
should keep it off the RFC Editor's queue until it is fixed.

...

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/radiusext/>