tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-calext-subscription-upgrade-13
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2025-04-11
IETF LC End Date: 2025-04-14
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the
review.
ISSUES: 8
NITS
alisation
behaviors separately in structured fields, mirroring the approach that’s taken
in many other modern parts of the web stack such as html.
Cheers,
Sent from my iPhone
On 25 Feb 2025, at 3:10 pm, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
Ho Mark,
On 2/24/25 6:41 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
Hi Paul,
T
Ho Mark,
On 2/24/25 6:41 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
Hi Paul,
Thanks for the review; responses below --
On 25 Feb 2025, at 4:36 am, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
1) NIT: Lack of normative language for syntax
I gather this document intends to normatively specify some of the syntax of
HTTP requests
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-httpbis-cache-groups-03
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2025-02-24
IETF LC End Date: 2025-02-26
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should
be fixed before publication.
ISS
Hey! There has been deafening silence on this query.
Anybody out there have any experience with SIPREC? If so, please speak up.
Thanks,
Paul
On 1/22/25 10:03 AM, MATHEAU Franck (SNCF / DIR TECHNOLOGIES INNOVATION
ET PROJETS GROUPE / DIN & RECH EUROPE) wrote:
Dear fellows,
I w
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-nmop-terminology-07
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2025-02-01
IETF LC End Date: TBD
IESG Telechat date: TBD
Summary:
This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should
be fixed before publication.
The changes
Is there anybody here with a siprec implementation???
On 1/22/25 10:03 AM, MATHEAU Franck (SNCF / DIR TECHNOLOGIES INNOVATION
ET PROJETS GROUPE / DIN & RECH EUROPE) wrote:
Dear fellows,
I would like to contact you because after reading RFC 7865, i still have 2
questions.
1/ How the persistent
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-anima-brski-prm-17
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2025-01-27
IETF LC End Date: 2025-01-30
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should
be fixed before publication.
This wa
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-anima-brski-prm-17
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2025-01-27
IETF LC End Date: 2025-01-30
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should
be fixed before publication.
This wa
Sorry, please ignore this. It was sent by accident.
On 1/23/25 11:13 AM, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just
Sorry, please ignore this. It was sent by accident.
On 1/23/25 11:13 AM, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-anima-brski-prm-17
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2025-01-30
IETF LC End Date: 2025-01-30
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the
review.
Disclaimer:
This reviewer is
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-anima-brski-prm-17
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2025-01-30
IETF LC End Date: 2025-01-30
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the
review.
Disclaimer:
This reviewer is
more information, please see the FAQ at
<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-jmap-webpush-vapid-05
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2024-12-04
IETF LC End Date: 2024-12-06
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is ready for publication as a Standards
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-jmap-webpush-vapid-05
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2024-12-04
IETF LC End Date: 2024-12-06
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is ready for publication as a Standards Track RFC.
This document gets the job done concisely. I
Adrian,
On 11/25/24 1:38 PM, Adrian Farrel wrote:
Hi Paul,
Thanks for the review. It's very helpful to improve the document.
The changes made are reflected below.
I don't see a -08 reflecting the changes you describe.
[snip]
You raise a reasonable point.
I think capitalisation will be hel
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft.
For more information, please see the FAQ at
<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-nmop-terminology-07
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2024-11-11
IETF LC End Date: TBD
IESG Telechat date: TBD
Summary:
Document: draft-ietf-pce-iana-update-02
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2024-10-28
IETF LC End Date: 2024-11-01
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is ready for publication as a Standards Track RFC.
This document concisely spells out what could have been a complex change
Sorry. This was to be an artart review. I sent it to the wrong place.
On 10/28/24 5:06 PM, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these
Sorry. This was to be an artart review. I sent it to the wrong place.
On 10/28/24 5:06 PM, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-pce-iana-update-02
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2024-10-28
IETF LC End Date: 2024-11-01
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is ready for publication as a Standards Track RFC.
This document concisely spells out what could hav
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-pce-iana-update-02
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2024-10-28
IETF LC End Date: 2024-11-01
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is ready for publication as a Standards Track RFC.
This document concisely spells out what could hav
=draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-optional-10
Please see more details below inline.
Respect,
Cheng
-Original Message-
From: Paul Kyzivat
Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2024 7:09 PM
To: draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-optional@ietf.org; pce@ietf.org
Cc: General Area Review Team ; last-c...@ietf.org
=draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-optional-10
Please see more details below inline.
Respect,
Cheng
-Original Message-
From: Paul Kyzivat
Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2024 7:09 PM
To: draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-optional@ietf.org; p...@ietf.org
Cc: General Area Review Team ; last-c...@ietf.org
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-optional-09
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2024-10-01
IETF LC End Date: 2024-10-03
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should
be fixed before publi
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-optional-09
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2024-10-01
IETF LC End Date: 2024-10-03
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should
be fixed before publi
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft.
For more information, please see the FAQ at
<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-nvo3-geneve-oam-10
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2024-08-27
IETF LC End Date: TBD
IESG Telechat date: TBD
Summary:
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft.
For more information, please see the FAQ at
<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-nvo3-geneve-oam-10
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2024-08-27
IETF LC End Date: TBD
IESG Telechat date: TBD
Summary:
On 7/4/24 8:15 PM, Dale R. Worley wrote:
Paul Kyzivat writes:
I just reviewed one [document of a cluster]. And this isn't the first
time I've reviewed [one] of a cluster like this.
It bothers me that he genart/artart reviews of the documents in such a
cluster don't take the re
Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of
draft-ietf-manet-dlep-ether-credit-extension-05
On 7/4/24 2:39 PM, Behcet Sarikaya via Datatracker wrote:
...
This document is part of a cluster of four which together specify a
credit-base flow control extension to DLEP. ...
I just reviewed one of
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-manet-dlep-da-credit-extension-17
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2024-07-02
IETF LC End Date: 2024-07-09
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is ready for publication as a Standards Track RFC.
This document is very well writte
:51 AM Paul Kyzivat <mailto:pkyzi...@alum.mit.edu>> wrote:
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-mpls-msd-yang-05
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2024-05-27
IETF LC End Date: 2024-06-04
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the
review.
Disclaimer:
This reviewer is
Hi Luigi,
Below I've edited out all the stuff that is settled and irrelevant to
remaining issues. Then I inserted my comments.
On 5/6/24 7:17 AM, Luigi IANNONE wrote:
2) ISSUE: Working of OT network domains
...
[LI] You got it right. What about the following (re-using part of your wording)
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft.
For more information, please see the FAQ at
<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-6lo-path-aware-semantic-addressing-05
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2024-04-29
IETF LC End Date: TBD
IESG Telechat dat
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft.
For more information, please see the FAQ at
<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-6lo-path-aware-semantic-addressing-05
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2024-04-29
IETF LC End Date: TBD
IESG Telechat dat
s,
Corey
-Original Message-
From: Paul Kyzivat
Sent: Wednesday, April 3, 2024 10:19 AM
To: Corey Bonnell ;
draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5019bis@ietf.org
Cc: General Area Review Team ; last-c...@ietf.org; LAMPS
Subject: Re: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5019bis-05
Corey,
On 4/3/24
Corey,
On 4/3/24 8:45 AM, Corey Bonnell wrote:
Hello Paul,
Thank you for your detailed review and insightful feedback. We have just
uploaded -06 to the Datatracker:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5019bis/.
We believe -06 addresses all the concerns that you raised. Please l
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5019bis-05
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2024-03-23
IETF LC End Date: 2024-03-29
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the
review.
ISSUES:
MINOR: 4
1)
Daniel,
On 2/22/24 4:28 PM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
On Thu 2024-02-22 15:41:35 -0500, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
But I do encourage you to say *something* about web server based email
clients, since they are such a big part of the ecosystem. (What
percentage of all emails have gmail on at least
itors have had a chance to review and discuss,
we'll probably roll them up with the suggestions from other reviewers
into a new draft.
More comments interleaved below:
On Sat 2024-02-17 18:31:18 -0500, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
1) NIT: Section 9.7.2:
In the following:
"If such a proxy hand
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-lamps-e2e-mail-guidance-14
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2024-02-17
IETF LC End Date: 2024-02-19
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should
be fixed before publication.
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-netconf-trust-anchors-22
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2024-01-24
IETF LC End Date: 2024-01-24
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should
be fixed before publication.
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-detnet-pof-06
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2023-11-16
IETF LC End Date: 2023-11-22
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is ready for publication as an Informational RFC.
Issues
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at <https://wiki.ietf.org/group/gen/GenArtFAQ>.
Please resolve these comments along with any other comments you may receive.
Document: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-mh-pa-09
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at <https://wiki.ietf.org/group/gen/GenArtFAQ>.
Please resolve these comments along with any other comments you may receive.
Document: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-mh-pa-09
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
John,
I appreciate your points. I understand that there are tradeoffs. Perhaps
we do need community input on this.
Normally I copy the wg on genart reviews. Since there was no wg here I
didn't do that, and forget to copy the Last Call list. How do I fix that
and include your reply? Should fu
Document: draft-freed-smtp-limits-06
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2023-09-15
IETF LC End Date: 2023-10-04
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary: This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described
in the review.
Minor Issue: How the new IANA registry is specified
Section 7.2 seems
On 9/7/23 8:44 AM, Roman Shpount wrote:
No, A is not on hold. Placing on hold requires a user action. Unless the
user of A placed it on hold, A is not on hold. Anything done by B doesn't
affect A hold status.
+1
An offer should only be based on local preferences, because the other
side can ex
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-nvo3-bfd-geneve-11
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2023-07-11
IETF LC End Date: 2023-07-08
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is ready for publication as a Standards Track RFC.
__
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-nvo3-bfd-geneve-11
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2023-07-11
IETF LC End Date: 2023-07-08
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is ready for publication as a Standards Track RFC.
___
G
information, please see the FAQ at
<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-lsr-ip-flexalgo-11
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2023-05-12
IETF LC End Date: 2023-05-16
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nit
information, please see the FAQ at
<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-lsr-ip-flexalgo-11
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2023-05-12
IETF LC End Date: 2023-05-16
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nit
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-lsr-ip-flexalgo-11
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2023-05-16
IETF LC End Date: 2023-05-16
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should
be fixed before publication.
NITS
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-lsr-ip-flexalgo-11
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2023-05-16
IETF LC End Date: 2023-05-16
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should
be fixed before publication.
NITS
ange your review status with this new revision.
Thank you,
Linda
-Original Message-----
From: Paul Kyzivat
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2023 10:20 PM
To: Linda Dunbar ;
draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-problem-statement@ietf.org
Cc: General Area Review Team ; rtgwg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Gen-art
ange your review status with this new revision.
Thank you,
Linda
-Original Message-----
From: Paul Kyzivat
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2023 10:20 PM
To: Linda Dunbar ;
draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-problem-statement@ietf.org
Cc: General Area Review Team ; rt...@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Gen-art
Linda,
I finally convinced the review tracking system to recognize my revision
to the review.
Sorry for the trouble,
Paul
On 3/22/23 5:07 PM, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
Linda,
On 3/22/23 4:48 PM, Linda Dunbar wrote:
Paul,
Thank you very much. Can you please change the review
Linda,
I finally convinced the review tracking system to recognize my revision
to the review.
Sorry for the trouble,
Paul
On 3/22/23 5:07 PM, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
Linda,
On 3/22/23 4:48 PM, Linda Dunbar wrote:
Paul,
Thank you very much. Can you please change the review
currently struggling with the review tracking system to get the
status change recorded there, but will do so.
Thanks,
Paul
Thank you very much,
Linda
-Original Message-----
From: Paul Kyzivat
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2023 9:25 AM
To: Linda Dunbar ;
draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2clo
currently struggling with the review tracking system to get the
status change recorded there, but will do so.
Thanks,
Paul
Thank you very much,
Linda
-Original Message-----
From: Paul Kyzivat
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2023 9:25 AM
To: Linda Dunbar ;
draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2clo
<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-problem-statement-21
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2023-03-22
IETF LC End Date: ?
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should
be fixed before
<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-problem-statement-21
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2023-03-22
IETF LC End Date: ?
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should
be fixed before
Hi Linda,
On 3/21/23 8:10 PM, Linda Dunbar wrote:
Paul,
Thank you very much for the review.
Please see below for the resolution to your comments.
The revision will be uploaded next Monday when the IETF submission opens.
Linda
I've included some followup comments inline below.
[snip]
ISSUE (
Hi Linda,
On 3/21/23 8:10 PM, Linda Dunbar wrote:
Paul,
Thank you very much for the review.
Please see below for the resolution to your comments.
The revision will be uploaded next Monday when the IETF submission opens.
Linda
I've included some followup comments inline below.
[snip]
ISSUE (
<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-problem-statement-21
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2023-03-19
IETF LC End Date: ?
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the
review.
Note: Th
<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-problem-statement-21
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2023-03-19
IETF LC End Date: ?
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the
review.
Note: Th
nts as drafts rather than
progressing them to informational rfcs.
Thanks,
Paul
Cheers,
John
*From: *Paul Kyzivat
*Date: *Friday, 20 January 2023 at 18:32
*To: *draft-ietf-ace-extend-dtls-authorize@ietf.org
*Cc: *General Area Review Team , last-c...@ietf.org
, ace@ietf.org
nts as drafts rather than
progressing them to informational rfcs.
Thanks,
Paul
Cheers,
John
*From: *Paul Kyzivat
*Date: *Friday, 20 January 2023 at 18:32
*To: *draft-ietf-ace-extend-dtls-authorize@ietf.org
*Cc: *General Area Review Team , last-c...@ietf.org
, a...@ietf.org
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-ace-extend-dtls-authorize-05
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2023-01-20
IETF LC End Date: 2023-01-24
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the
review.
Issues: 1
1) ISSUE
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-ace-extend-dtls-authorize-05
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2023-01-20
IETF LC End Date: 2023-01-24
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the
review.
Issues: 1
1) ISSUE
information, please see the FAQ at
<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-opsawg-service-assurance-architecture-11
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2022-11-15
IETF LC End Date: 2022-11-20
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is on the right track but ha
information, please see the FAQ at
<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-opsawg-service-assurance-architecture-11
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2022-11-15
IETF LC End Date: 2022-11-20
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is on the right track but ha
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-opsawg-service-assurance-architecture-11
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2022-11-15
IETF LC End Date: 2022-11-20
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the
review.
Issues:
Russ,
On 10/25/22 2:20 PM, Russ Housley wrote:
Paul:
Document: draft-ietf-lamps-rfc3709bis-06
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2022-10-25
IETF LC End Date: 2022-10-28
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the review.
Issues
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-lamps-rfc3709bis-06
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2022-10-25
IETF LC End Date: 2022-10-28
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the
review.
Issues:
Major: 0
Minor: 1
Ni
Arun,
On 9/22/22 10:56 AM, Arun Tagare wrote:
Thanks Ranjit,
Yes for the signalling part i am aware, but as shared earlier how the RTP
from N/w and other UE in same session be differentiate?
So SSRC will be different right?
*Nothing* is certain here!
The SSRC may be different, but not neces
Ketan,
I've trimmed the conversation down to just the relevant points.
On 9/21/22 10:07 AM, Ketan Talaulikar wrote:
KT> This ID-nits warning is perhaps simply because the normative
reference is not from an IETF publication and so perhaps the tool is not
able to determine if that publication i
Ketan,
On 9/20/22 10:30 AM, Ketan Talaulikar wrote:
1) NIT: 1 Introduction
IDNITS reports:
-- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref.
'IEEE802.1AX'
As best I can tell there is no need for this reference to be normative.
(Its only an example i
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-l2bundles-06
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2022-09-16
IETF LC End Date: 2022-09-29
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the
review.
Issues:
Major: 0
Minor:
have been sent as part of a test. If so the sender may intentionally
be generating error cases to see if your implementation responds to them
as it should.
Thanks,
Paul
BR///Rakesh
On Thu, Aug 4, 2022 at 8:24 PM Paul Kyzivat <mailto:pkyzi...@alum.mit.edu>> wrote:
On 8/4/22 8:11 AM, Rakesh wrote:
Hi Team,
I could see in a sip CANCEL message From Header as below
From: "test" ;tag=3bbb9483d215d830c635372f8f181929
is this correct?
Just looking at this, without regard for context, it is valid syntax.
(The userinfo portion of the sip URI is optional.)
B
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-sidrops-rov-no-rr
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2022-07-23
IETF LC End Date: 2022-08-02
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is ready for publication as a Standards Track RFC.
Issues:
Major: 0
Minor: 0
Ni
On 6/28/22 4:19 AM, Gilson Urbano Ferreira Dias wrote:
Dale,
The three pseudo-dialogs are for different AORs.
It would be very helpful if you would post the full messages.
Thanks,
Paul
Does this change anything in the analysis?
Regards,
Gilson Urbano
__
at 9:01 PM Paul Kyzivat wrote:
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.
For more information, please se
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-flags-08
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2022-06-??
IETF LC End Date: 2022-06-14
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should
be fixed before publication.
Issues:
I've been seeing this discussion of Russ' artart review.
But I have seen no discussion of my genart review of it. Did you perhaps
not get it?
Thanks,
Paul
On 4/7/22 4:52 PM, Mingliang Pei wrote:
Hi Russ,
Great, thank you. Please see inline. I will update RFC with the two
poi
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-teep-architecture-16
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2022-04-??
IETF LC End Date: 2022-04-07
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the
review.
Issues:
Major: 0
Minor:
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-6man-mtu-option-12
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2022-02-04
IETF LC End Date: 2022-02-10
IESG Telechat date: ??
Summary:
This draft is ready for publication as an Experimental RFC.
Comments and Questions:
I didn't attempt
sawg-mud-iot-dns-considerations-02
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2021-12-18
IETF LC End Date: ?
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the
review.
General Thoughts:
I struggled in choosing a Summary statement. I'm caught betwe
Arun,
Your query doesn't have enough context to understand the case. It does
however appear to more likely to be something that should be answered by
someone in the 3GPP IMS community. If you want an answer here please
spell out your case in much more detail.
Thanks,
Paul
On
, please see the FAQ at <
http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
For more information, please see the FAQ at
<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-bum-procedure-updates-11
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2021-10-13
IETF
low.
-Original Message-
From: Paul Kyzivat
Sent: Wednesday, September 8, 2021 11:15 AM
To: Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang ;
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-bum-procedure-updates@ietf.org
Cc: General Area Review Team
Subject: Re: Gen-ART Last Call review of
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-bum-procedure-updates
Hi Jeffrey (Zhaohui),
You comments are helpful for me to better understand how this document
relates to the other two. But it doesn't alter my conclusions. More inline.
IIUC, RFC7117 improved the handling of BUM traffic for VPLS, but did not
address BUM traffic for EVPN. Then RFC7432 specifie
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-bum-procedure-updates-09
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2021-09-04
IETF LC End Date: 2021-09-07
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft has serious issues, described in the review, and needs to be
rethought.
Genera
On 7/7/21 12:31 AM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
On 3 Jul 2021, at 2:00 am, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
I suggest you provide IANA with a template for the registry, and provide
authors of extension parameters with a template for what should be included in
a specification document.
There
Hi Mark,
On 7/2/21 2:05 AM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
Hi Paul,
Thanks for the review; I've added the WG mailing list to the CC.
On 2 Jul 2021, at 2:55 am, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
1) Minor: Is a hit or fwd parameter required?
Is it required that an entry contain one of "hit" or &qu
tps://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-httpbis-cache-header-08
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2021-07-07
IETF LC End Date: 2021-07-01
IESG Telechat date: ?
Summary:
This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the
review.
General:
What I r
Ranjit,
BTW, did you notice that there is an erata applying to section 9 of
RFC4028? If you didn't notice, it might be confusing you.
On 5/28/21 5:59 PM, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
On 5/28/21 4:40 PM, Ranjit Avasarala wrote:
Hi Holi
The RFC says UAS should add a Require: timer in response
On 5/28/21 4:40 PM, Ranjit Avasarala wrote:
Hi Holi
The RFC says UAS should add a Require: timer in response when UAC is the
refresher to indicate to UAC that it is the refresher. But I think this is
redundant as UAC anyway knows it is the refresher and does not need a
reminder from UAS.
The U
1 - 100 of 2999 matches
Mail list logo
