>>> Tim Evens via Datatracker schrieb am 13.02.2021 um 00:51
in
Nachricht <161317387496.31377.7416127213693172...@ietfa.amsl.com>:
...
> Are the backslashes required here? It seems that many examples have them
> when
> there is a value and the closing tag is not on the same line. For example:
.
Reviewer: Roni Even
Review result: Almost Ready
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 inform
Reviewer: Roni Even
Review result: Ready with Nits
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 inf
On 15/02/2021 08:54, Ulrich Windl wrote:
Tim Evens via Datatracker schrieb am 13.02.2021 um 00:51
in
Nachricht <161317387496.31377.7416127213693172...@ietfa.amsl.com>:
...
Are the backslashes required here? It seems that many examples have them
when
there is a value and the closing tag is not
Hi Roni,
Thanks for the review. Your comment is addressed below.
On 2/15/21 5:32 AM, Roni Even via Datatracker wrote:
Reviewer: Roni Even
Review result: Ready with Nits
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being
Reviewer: Stewart Bryant
Review result: Ready
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 informat
Thanks, that makes sense.
On 2/15/21, 4:01 AM, "tom petch" wrote:
On 15/02/2021 08:54, Ulrich Windl wrote:
Tim Evens via Datatracker schrieb am 13.02.2021 um 00:51
> in
> Nachricht <161317387496.31377.7416127213693172...@ietfa.amsl.com>:
>
> ...
>> Are the backslashes required here? It se
Hi Roni,
> Minor issues:
> It is not clear what is the backward interoperability is, I noticed
> that only rsa1024-sha1 is deprecated. It would be good to add some
> text maybe in section 4 that will explain it and maybe have some
> recommendations for client and server side.
The simple answer is
Hi Mark,
A couple of minor issues with the recommended text (grammatical, not technical):
On Feb 15, 2021, at 10:54 AM, Mark D. Baushke
wrote:
> Suggestion to the reviewer of replacement paragraphs before the table in
> section 4 "Summary Guidance for Key Exchange Method Names Implementations"
Ron Frederick writes:
> Hi Mark,
>
> A couple of minor issues with the recommended text (grammatical, not
> technical):
As always, any feedback greatfully received.
> On Feb 15, 2021, at 10:54 AM, Mark D. Baushke
> wrote:
> > Suggestion to the reviewer of replacement paragraphs before the ta
Hi Mark,
On Feb 15, 2021, at 1:06 PM, Mark D. Baushke wrote:
> Ron Frederick writes:
>> On Feb 15, 2021, at 10:54 AM, Mark D. Baushke
>> wrote:
>>> Suggestion to the reviewer of replacement paragraphs before the table in
>>> section 4 "Summary Guidance for Key Exchange Method Names Implementat
Vijay, thanks for your review. Balázs, thanks for responding. I entered a No
Objection ballot.
Alissa
> On Feb 8, 2021, at 3:44 PM, Balázs Varga A
> wrote:
>
> Hi Vijay,
> Many thanks for your review.
> I will fix your nits in the next version. (See inline)
> Thanks
> Bala'zs
>
> -Origi
Ron Frederick writes:
> Hi Mark,
>
> On Feb 15, 2021, at 1:06 PM, Mark D. Baushke wrote:
> > Ron Frederick writes:
> >> On Feb 15, 2021, at 10:54 AM, Mark D. Baushke
> >> wrote:
> >>> Suggestion to the reviewer of replacement paragraphs before the table in
> >>> section 4 "Summary Guidance f
Ines, thanks for your review. Christian, thanks for your response. I entered a
No Objection ballot.
Alissa
> On Dec 9, 2020, at 9:10 AM, Christian M. Amsüss wrote:
>
> Hello Ines,
>
> thanks for your comments.
>
> The expansions are done or WIP in our version, and will be part of the
> next
Reviewer: Joel Halpern
Review result: Ready with Issues
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 mor
Hi Scott,
> Dan, thanks for the review. Would you please give me a little more on
> what you think is needed to explain the relationship between the two
> documents? I can't think of much more to say beyond "7482 describes
> protocol queries" and "7483 describes protocol responses to the queries
>
Reviewer: Meral Shirazipour
Review result: Almost Ready
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 mor
17 matches
Mail list logo
