(long overdue update) There having been no dissent, objections, or concerns raised consensus is that the group would like to adopt this document. Please re-upload draft-donnelly-capport-detection-02 with -ietf- in the name. I might suggest changing the suffix to something like "-capport-api" (since this document is no longer about detection). (draft-ietf-capport-api-00) Thanks! On 30 August 2017 at 20:03, Erik Kline <[email protected]> wrote: > All, > > As indicated in the minutes from Prague > [https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-99-capport/], there was a > general hum in favor of the API document: > > """ > 4. API document: do we need a milestone? Humming: in favor. > 5. Is this document a good basis. Humming in favor. > """" > > This email is to initiate a two week call for adoption for: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-donnelly-capport-detection/ > > Feedback requested, even if only to restate an opinion expressed in Prague. > > Thanks, > -Erik
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature