RE: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ltans-reqs-03.txt

[Peter Sylvester <Peter.Sylvester@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> 
> Denis,
> 
> Clearly more than "none of the comments" were addressed.  As noted when the
> draft was posted, this version aimed to address all editorial comments and
> many of the non-editorial comments.  There are several bracketed comments
> included in the new version that highlight particular areas for discussion.
> Several of these are related directly to your comments.   Additionally, a
> set of email responses were sent on 10/5 (along with several other responses
> with questions regarding some of the suggestions).  A large amount of your
> comments were focused on mechanisms.  I was not prepared to shift the focus
> of the requirements document in that direction prior to the deadline for
> publication.  None of your comments are off the table.
> 
> Carl
> 

I had the impression that some of the points may be shifting to the 
notarisation part, by splitting a TAS into a backend archive service that mainly 
provides some reference to data and some front end notarisation that provides 
some appropriate attestation(s).