Subject: [Uta] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-uta-tls-for-email-04: (with COMMENT)

From: Mirja Kühlewind via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2020 04:13:04 -0800

Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-uta-tls-for-email-04: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-uta-tls-for-email/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't think it would have been necessary for this document to use the OLD/NEW
style update. Effectively, you've replaced all occurrences of "1.1" with "1.2"
and one occurrence of "TLS 1.0" with "TLS 1.0 or TLS 1.1". I would think
everybody who is smart enough to understand the content of the updated RFC,
should also be able to make this exchange in their head on their own. However
it's a short document no matter what, so probably not an issue one way or the
other.