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 wait for direction from your
document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft.
For more information, please
On 12 Aug 2016, at 10:40, Elwyn Davies 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 wait for direction from your
document shepherd or AD before posting a new vers
Hi Jouni,
Thanks for the review. I have a few comments as draft shepherd (anything that
I don't comment on below is editorial and will likely just be fixed in the next
version):
>- It repeats.. the same statements multiple times.
If you have specific examples of repeated statements that c
Hi Jouni,
Thank you for the review and correction. Pls see inline below.
-Original Message-
From: Gen-art [mailto:gen-art-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jouni
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2016 1:51 AM
To: gen-art@ietf.org (gen-art@ietf.org);
draft-ietf-tsvwg-gre-in-udp-encap@ietf.org
Sub
Hi Jouni,
OOPS, forget this one, sorry.
o My “complaint” of this document is basically on the following.. these are
writing
style things so feel free to neglect:
- It repeats.. the same statements multiple times.
Lucy: perhaps some can reference previous section.
- When reading the doc
Hi, Ben.
AFAICS there is only one really similar case (downref to RFC 6707) which was
approved just last month (based on a problem statement). My concern here is
that the other framework and requirements documents are documents that continue
to have a relevance (such as telling a network operat
