[Gen-art] Re: Gen-ART LC Review of draft-ietf-mpls-over-l2tpv3-01.txt

ntly random and remains unknown to an attacker (that is, the >attacker has no way to predict Cookie values or monitor traffic >between PEs) then the Cookie provides an additional measure of >protection against malicious spoofed packets inserted at the PE over >and above t

[Gen-art] Re: Gen-ART LC Review of draft-ietf-mpls-over-l2tpv3-01.txt

t being made here. Why does >>> traversing the public internet make this impossible, if crossing >>> administrative domain boundaries makes it difficult? >> Note that a design consideration for this section is to be inline with >> RFC4023, so there is a desire to stay consistent in this sentence. See >> second para in http://ietf-tools.sth.netnod.se/html/rfc4023#section-8.2 > > I understand the design consideration (and see that the same paragraph > appears in RFC 4023), I was saying that the text didn't explain why > destination filtering was difficult/impossible. It may be that I'm the only > person who doesn't know why - in that case, the text is fine :-) > OK, will keep the text as is. Many thanks for your review ! --Carlos. > Thanks, > > Spencer > -- --Carlos Pignataro. Escalation RTP - cisco Systems ___ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

[Gen-art] Re: Gen-ART review of draft-cheshire-ipv4-acd-05.txt

ob restricting operation to unicast ARP > Replies, and the default setting SHOULD be 'unicast'"? > >universally. Broadcast ARP Replies should be used where the benefit >of faster conflict detection outweighs the cost of increased >broadcast traffic and increased packet processin

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-softwire-hs-framework-l2tpv2-10

er case > as appropriate. > - Please expand the ULA acronym on its first use in Section > 6.1.1 . > > Thanks, > --David > > David L. Black, Distinguished Engineer > EMC Corporation, 176 South S

Re: [Gen-art] [Softwires] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-softwire-hs-framework-l2tpv2-10

Alain, Mark, We are planning on posting a new revision -11 when we close on these. David, Thanks again for the review, please see inline. On 12/10/2008 2:03 PM, Carlos Pignataro said the following: > David, > > Thanks much for taking the time to read the draft and for provi

Re: [Gen-art] [Softwires] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-softwire-hs-framework-l2tpv2-10

? > > The description of what is to be done about the remaining minor > items is fine with me. OK. Thanks, --Carlos. > > Thanks, > --David > > >> -Original Message- >> From: gen-art-boun...@ietf.org >> [mailto:gen-art-boun...@ietf.org] On

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-mammoliti-l2tp-accessline-avp-04

e > go ahead and disregard this nit, but if that is not the case, > then a definition will help. Even if they are well understood terms, we will add these ("LAC", "LNS" and also "LCCE") to S2.2. This came up also in the Sec-Dir review. Thanks f

Re: [Gen-art] [Softwires] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-softwire-hs-framework-l2tpv2-10

> David L. Black, Distinguished Engineer > EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA 01748 > +1 (508) 293-7953 FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786 > black_da...@emc.comMobile: +1 (978) 394-7754 > --

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ospf-dynamic-hostname-03

sage - > From: "Sanjay Harwani (sharwani)" > To: "Spencer Dawkins" ; "Subbaiah Venkata" > ; "Danny McPherson" ; "Carlos Pignataro > (cpignata)" > Cc: ; "General Area Review Team" ; "Ross > Callon" ; &q

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ospf-dynamic-hostname-03

ted hostname note in the Security Considerations section, > and not in Section 3). > > Thanks, > > Spencer > > - Original Message - > From: "Carlos Pignataro" > To: "Spencer Dawkins" > Cc: "Sanjay Harwani (sharwani)" ; "

Re: [Gen-art] [L2tpext] Gen-ART Review of draft-ietf-l2tpext-circuit-status-extensions-04

Hello Pete, Many thanks for your review. Please see inline. On 6/15/2009 1:57 PM, McCann Peter-A001034 wrote: > I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviewer > for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see > http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html)

Re: [Gen-art] Gen Art review of draft-ietf-softwire-lb-03

Avshalom, Thank you for your review. As you identified, it would be useful to cite the applicable security considerations that are documented and inherited. I think that the following change would address your concerns. This document defines a very incremental addition of a sub-TLV, it would seem

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-atlas-icmp-unnumbered-08

David, Thank you for your time to review, please see inline. On 12/27/2009 5:52 PM, black_da...@emc.com wrote: > I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) > reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see > http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.ht

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-atlas-icmp-unnumbered-08

[adding JR to Cc:] On 12/27/2009 6:02 PM, black_da...@emc.com wrote: > And the draft needs a new email address for JR: Yes, we will fix this before publication. Thanks again, -- Carlos. > > Your message did not reach some or all of the intended recipients. > > Subject:Gen-ART r

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-atlas-icmp-unnumbered-08

David, Please find one additional comment response to your suggestion. Excerpts from black_da...@emc.com on 12/27/2009: > I suggest adding a Section 3.3 to discuss use of ifIndex with ICMP and > network management tools (e.g., enhanced traceroute plus an SNMP > manager) I still feel that discuss

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-atlas-icmp-unnumbered-08

MPLS Label=301856 Exp=0 TTL=2 S=1 But RFC4950 does not prescribe a traceroute + LIB/LFIB manager, which I think would be analogous. Thanks, -- Carlos. On 12/28/2009 11:48 AM, Carlos Pignataro wrote: > David, > > Please find one additional comment response to your suggestion. > >

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-atlas-icmp-unnumbered-08

raft's text uses a > "MAY ... only in the following circumstances" construction, which is an > ambiguous variant of MAY NOT. I understand what was meant, but in order > to use RFC 2119 keywords to correctly impose the two "only in the > following > circumstan

[Gen-art] Re: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-characterization-03

Many thanks, Roni, for your review and summary! Carlos. On Thu, Oct 31, 2024 at 5:46 PM Roni Even via Datatracker wrote: > Reviewer: Roni Even > 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

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-opsec-ip-options-filtering-05.txt

Many thanks for your review, Suresh. We will propose resolutions to these three comments you make. Thanks, -- Carlos. On Nov 18, 2013, at 12:54 AM, Suresh Krishnan wrote: > I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviewer > for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, pl

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-opsec-ip-options-filtering-05.txt

Jari, Yes, Suresh and I/authors have already agreed on changes that I have incorporated into our working copy. Apologies for not closing the loop with you, will forward. Thanks! Thumb typed by Carlos Pignataro. Excuze typofraphicak errows > On Nov 21, 2013, at 6:49 AM, "Jari Arkko

[Gen-art] Fwd: Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-opsec-ip-options-filtering-05.txt

Closing the loop on this Gen-ART review. Thanks again Suresh for reviewing. Thumb typed by Carlos Pignataro. Excuze typofraphicak errows Begin forwarded message: From: Suresh Krishnan mailto:suresh.krish...@ericsson.com>> Date: November 18, 2013 at 4:12:19 PM EST To: "Carlo

Re: [Gen-art] [mpls] review: draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply-04

Hi Lizhong, Please also take into consideration the Ops Dir review of this doc, in which I have similar concerns as those from Joel. There seem to be three major areas in discussion: 1. The scope of the problem being solved (i.e., which cases are solved, which are not, and which are the common

Re: [Gen-art] review of draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-only-gap-03.txt

Many thanks, Francis, for this review! All nits acknowledged and fixed. Thanks, Carlos. > On Oct 29, 2014, at 9:56 AM, Francis Dupont wrote: > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on > Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at > >

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-mpls-oam-ipv6-rao-02

Hi, Brian, Thanks for your review! Please see inline. > On Jan 25, 2015, at 2:29 PM, Brian E Carpenter > wrote: > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on > Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at > . > > Please res

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-mpls-oam-ipv6-rao-02

Hi, Brian, On Jan 25, 2015, at 4:47 PM, Brian E Carpenter mailto:brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com>> wrote: Hi Carlos, On 26/01/2015 08:49, Carlos Pignataro (cpignata) wrote: Hi, Brian, Thanks for your review! Please see inline. On Jan 25, 2015, at 2:29 PM, Brian E Carpenter mailto:brian.e.

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-mpls-oam-ipv6-rao-02

Thank you. > On Jan 26, 2015, at 5:05 PM, Brian E Carpenter > wrote: > > Looks good to me, thanks. > > Brian > > On 27/01/2015 09:36, Carlos Pignataro (cpignata) wrote: >> Hi, Brian, >> >> On Jan 25, 2015, at 4:47 PM, Brian E Carpenter >

Re: [Gen-art] Last Call review of draft-ietf-sfc-architecture-08

Tom, All great comments — thank you. All incorporated into our working copy (diffs attached here FYI) — we can submit when Jim/Alia signal. Thanks, — Carlos. Title: Diff: draft-ietf-sfc-architecture-08.txt - draft-ietf-sfc-architecture-09.txt  draft-ietf-sfc-architecture-08.tx

Re: [Gen-art] Last Call review of draft-ietf-sfc-architecture-08

nsdierations in four areas:² > > > 1. Change BUilding to Building. > 2. Change consdierations to considerations. > > Jim > > On 5/21/15, 11:50 PM, "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" > wrote: > >> Tom, >> >> All great comments ‹ thank you. >&g

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat Call review of draft-ietf-intarea-gre-ipv6-11

Thank you, Meral! Thumb typed by Carlos Pignataro. Excuze typofraphicak errows On Aug 6, 2015, at 02:17, Meral Shirazipour mailto:meral.shirazip...@ericsson.com>> wrote: I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at &

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-bfd-seamless-base-08

Hi, Dan, Many thanks for this review! Although you label these as not-shot-stoppers, they are very useful. Here’s a follow-up: You are correct, set-up states transitions are minimized or eliminated with S-BFD. However, it can be argued (and it was our initial thinking) that the state set-up is

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Review of draft-ietf-bfd-seamless-ip-03

Dan, Many thanks for this review! You raise two good questions, here’s my take: I do not have a strong opinion one way or another — I will leave this one to the AD’s guidance, and I am happy to mark this document as updating RFC 5881 if that’s the preferred direction. Indeed — fixed in our work

Re: [Gen-art] review of draft-ietf-pals-seamless-vccv-02.txt

[Correcting gem-art with gen-art in the email alias] Many thanks for your review, Francis. All editorials fixed in my working copy. I left “encased” in since that term is used in RFC 5885 and others, but of course will take guidance from the RFC Editor. Thanks, — Carlos. > On Apr 5, 2016, at

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Review of draft-ietf-bfd-seamless-ip-03

> On Apr 11, 2016, at 2:36 PM, Alvaro Retana (aretana) > wrote: > > On 4/11/16, 12:30 PM, "Jeffrey Haas" wrote: > > Hi! > >> On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 02:54:06PM +, Carlos Pignataro (cpignata) >> wrote: >>> Dan, >>> >>&

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-art LC review of draft-ietf-l2tpext-sbfd-discriminator-03

Elwyn, This is a great review. Thank you. Please see inline. Deborah, We will be queueing edits, let me know when you’d want us to post an updated revision. > On Apr 10, 2016, at 1:26 PM, Elwyn Davies wrote: > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Review Te

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-art LC review of draft-ietf-l2tpext-sbfd-discriminator-03

weekend, — Carlos. From: Elwyn Davies mailto:elw...@dial.pipex.com>> Date: Friday, April 15, 2016 at 12:30 PM To: Carlos Pignataro mailto:cpign...@cisco.com>> Cc: General area reviewing team mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>>, "draft-ietf-l2tpext-sbfd-discriminator@ietf.org<mail

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-ospf-sbfd-discriminator-04

Hi, Pete, Many thanks for your review. Good catches, I agree with the three editorial suggestions below. I’ve made these changes in our working copy. Thanks, — Carlos. > On Apr 18, 2016, at 12:09 PM, Pete Resnick wrote: > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-bfd-seamless-base-09

Thank you for your follow-up note, Dan! — Carlos. > On May 4, 2016, at 6:30 AM, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) 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

Re: [Gen-art] Geb-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-bfd-seamless-ip-04

Hi, Dan, Thanks for following up. Alvaro, as responsible AD, responded as you can see here: https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/gen-art/current/msg13149.html Thanks, — Carlos. > On May 4, 2016, at 6:46 AM, Romascanu, Dan

Re: [Gen-art] Late comment on draft-ietf-bfd-seamless-ip-04

Hi, Elwyn, Thanks for the re-review of a different document :-) All comments welcome and help, thanks. > On May 4, 2016, at 4:43 AM, Elwyn Davies wrote: > > Hi. > > While reviewing draft-ietf-l2tpext-sbfd-discriminator-05 for gen-art, I came > across a > 'common mode' issue with multiple dis

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-lsp-ping-04

Dear Peter, Many thanks for taking the time to go through the document with an editorial fine-tooth comb. Although your summary, labeled [Ready with nits], says: > I really have no problems with the documents other than some mostly > inconsequential nits. I took the time to fix every single one

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-art LC review of draft-ietf-mpls-rfc4379bis-07

Deal Elwyn, Many thanks for a great review! I just finished addressing all your comments: the major issue (easy to address, editorial fix, but with important implications), the minors, and all the nits. Surprisingly, I found a few small additional editorials, which I fixed as well. Rev -08 wou

Re: [Gen-art] Post-Telechat update (was Re: Gen-art LC review of draft-ietf-mpls-rfc4379bis-07)

w should have a blank reference. No. Because “Unassigned” comes with an Assignment criteria which is given in this document. Left as-is, as with all other Unassigned. On 28/10/2016 02:29, Carlos Pignataro (cpignata) wrote: Deal Elwyn, Many thanks for a great review! I just finished addressing all you

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-l2tpext-keyed-ipv6-tunnel-07

Thanks for the review, Paul! Authors, Please find some comments inline. Carlos, as shepherd. > On Oct 31, 2016, at 10:20 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 I

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-spring-oam-usecase-06

to a change. However, personally, I do not see the need. > > Minor issues: > > None. > > Nits/editorial comments: > > This document refers to RFC 4379, which has been obsoleted by RFC 8029. It > seems like the references should be updated. > > Indeed. Done

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-sfc-nsh-19

Hi, Dan, Many thanks for your detailed and valuable review, and apologies for the delay in Ack-ing and responding. Please see inline. — Carlos Pignataro, car...@cisco.com “Sometimes I use big words that I do not fully understand, to make myself sound more photosynthesis." > On Aug

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-sfc-nsh-19

Thanks to you, Dan! — Carlos Pignataro, car...@cisco.com<mailto:car...@cisco.com> “Sometimes I use big words that I do not fully understand, to make myself sound more photosynthesis." On Aug 31, 2017, at 11:56 PM, Dan Romascanu mailto:droma...@gmail.com>> wrote: Hi Carlo

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Review of draft-ietf-mpls-spring-lsp-ping-11

Thank you, Wassim! — Carlos Pignataro, car...@cisco.com<mailto:car...@cisco.com> “Sometimes I use big words that I do not fully understand, to make myself sound more photosynthesis." On Oct 9, 2017, at 2:10 PM, Wassim Haddad mailto:wassim.had...@ericsson.com>> wrote: I am

Re: [Gen-art] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam-methods-09

Brian, Thank you for your GenART review! I will let the authors comment on and propose edits for the “units” minor issue and the nits. However, please find one comment inline. > On Oct 14, 2017, at 12:39 AM, Brian Carpenter > wrote: > > Reviewer: Brian Carpenter > Review result: Ready with

Re: [Gen-art] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam-13

Many thanks for your review Elwyn, and for the quick response, Qin! Thumb typed by Carlos Pignataro. Excuze typofraphicak errows On Oct 24, 2017, at 03:21, Qin Wu mailto:bill...@huawei.com>> wrote: Elwyn: Thank for your valuable comments. Please see my reply inline below. -Qin ---

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ospf-dynamic-hostname-04

Thanks for the validation, Spencer. We did discuss the level (I.e., case) of the recommendation, and agreed in the lowercase "really good idea" qualified with "strongly". Thanks, -- Thumb typed by Carlos Pignataro. On Jun 30, 2009, at 12:41 PM, "Spencer Dawkins

Re: [Gen-art] Gen Art review of draft-ietf-softwire-lb-03

rst sentence re-summarizes the extent of the change for the context of the Security paragraph. Does this make sense? Thanks, -- Carlos. From: Avshalom Houri [mailto:avsha...@il.ibm.com] Sent: Monday, July 06, 2009 10:58 AM To: Carlos Pignataro (cpignata) Cc: Clarence Filsfils (cfil

Re: [Gen-art] Gen Art review of draft-ietf-softwire-lb-03

Thanks again, Avshalom, for the comments (that improve the document) and for taking the time to review! -- Thumb typed by Carlos Pignataro. On Jul 6, 2009, at 11:18 AM, "Avshalom Houri" wrote: Hi Carlos, OK with me as long as everyone that is familiar with the field unde

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-bmwg-mpls-forwarding-meth-05.txt

); General Area Review Team; bmwg-cha...@tools.ietf.org; Rajiv Asati (rajiva); Carlos Pignataro (cpignata) Subject: Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-bmwg-mpls-forwarding-meth-05.txt This is a manual repeat as I have been getting error messages from the tools server on the authors' address alias

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-atlas-icmp-unnumbered-08

:black_da...@emc.com] Sent: Monday, December 28, 2009 3:59 PM To: Carlos Pignataro (cpignata) Cc: alia.at...@bt.com; rbon...@juniper.net; jrriv...@alumni.calpoly.edu; Naiming Shen (naiming); gen-art@ietf.org; jari.ar...@piuha.net; black_da...@emc.com Subject: RE: Gen-ART review of draft-atlas-icmp-u

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review: draft-ietf-pwe3-pw-typed-wc-fec-03

Thank you Mary for the review and for catching all these editorials! Thumb typed by Carlos Pignataro. Excuze typofraphicak errows On Apr 9, 2012, at 3:22 PM, "Mary Barnes" wrote: > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on > Gen-ART, please see the

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping-03.txt

Thank you, Brian! Thumb typed by Carlos Pignataro. Excuze typofraphicak errows On Oct 30, 2012, at 7:02 AM, "Brian E Carpenter" wrote: > Please see attached review. > > Brian > > ___ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART telechat review of draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping-03.txt

Thanks much for the review, Brian! -- Carlos. On 11/9/12 2:49 PM, "Brian E Carpenter" wrote: >Please see attached review. > > Brian > > ___ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-gp-obsolete-icmp-types-iana-01

Many thanks for the review, Roni. On Jan 21, 2013, at 6:30 AM, Roni Even mailto:ron.even@gmail.com>> wrote: I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at . Please resolve these com

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-mpls-rfc8287-len-clarification-02

Hi, Ines, Many thanks for your very useful review! Thanks Alissa for flagging this. Please find some follow-up comments inline. > On Aug 6, 2019, at 3:11 PM, Alissa Cooper wrote: > > Ines, thanks for your review. I entered a DISCUSS ballot to get the figure > fixed in Section 4.2. > > Alissa