Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-rddp-sctp-06

less thought to follow this way. Chances are this could be handled as a note to the RFC Editor. Lars -- Lars Eggert NEC Network Laboratories smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ Gen-art mailing l

[Gen-art] Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ips-iscsi-nodearch-key-03

Harald, thanks for the review! On Dec 7, 2006, at 10:47, Harald Alvestrand wrote: 1) I read RFC 3720 section 13.5.2 as saying that publication of extensions as standards-track is allowed, even though the wording is quite convoluted. So the implication of the language in section 5 that it w

[Gen-art] Re: Gen-art review of draft-ietf-hip-rvs-05.txt

On 2007-4-4, at 23:06, ext Scott W Brim wrote: Nothing has changed since -04, so just FYI on idnits ... This is with my co-author hat on. idnits 2.04.05 found a few things ... Right. The document has entered pub-requested a few months back, and idnits has grown many new features in the me

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-2960bis

On 2007-5-17, at 19:09, ext Randall Stewart wrote: Lars: I will be asking for your advice throughout this reply to know what I can and cannot change... As far as I remember, the motivation for wanting to tightly scope which modifications were OK going from RFC2960 to tsvwg-2960bis was to pr

[Gen-art] Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ips-iscsi-impl-guide-08.txt

Suresh, thanks for the review. Authors, if you'd like to incorporate any of these suggestions, please email me a corresponding RFC Editor Note. Lars On 2007-6-4, at 23:12, ext Suresh Krishnan wrote: I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for draft-ietf-ips-iscsi-impl-guide-08.txt For backgro

[Gen-art] Re: Gen-ART review of IETF LC draft-ietf-dccp-rtp-06.txt

Miguel, thanks for the review! Colin: Is the current set of changes that were the result of the IETF LC concise enough to be put into an RFC Editor Note? If so, can you send me one before the telechat tonight? Otherwise I'll ask that the document be put into "Revised ID Needed." Thanks,

[Gen-art] Re: Gen-ART review of IETF LC draft-ietf-dccp-rtp-06.txt

On 2007-6-20, at 10:57, ext Colin Perkins wrote: On 20 Jun 2007, at 07:14, Lars Eggert wrote: Colin: Is the current set of changes that were the result of the IETF LC concise enough to be put into an RFC Editor Note? If so, can you send me one before the telechat tonight? Otherwise I&#x

[Gen-art] Re: Gen-art review of draft-ietf-ippm-bw-capacity-05

On 2007-10-9, at 1:35, ext Gonzalo Camarillo wrote: Even if IPPM is expanded at the top of the document as the working group this document comes from, the acronym could also be expanded on its first use in the actual body of the document. We'll do that with an RFC Editor Note, assuming the au

[Gen-art] Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ippm-storetraceroutes-07

Hi, thanks for the thorough review, Pasi! Authors, please let us know how you're planning to address these comments. I'm assuming that a revision will be required before this document can enter IESG evaluation. Lars On 2008-1-10, at 14:09, Eronen Pasi (Nokia-OCTO/Helsinki) wrote: I have

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-dccp-dtls-05.txt

Brian, On 2008-2-26, at 5:38, ext Brian E Carpenter wrote: > thanks for the review! Authors, please let me know if and how you'd like to address Brian's comments. It seems that an RFC Editor Note would suffice; please prepare one and send it to me for inclusion in the tracker. Lars ___

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ippm-storetraceroutes-07 (-08)

Pasi, thanks for the reply. Looking through your followup, it seems that another revision is required before this can go before the IESG. Authors, please respond in a followup email to each issue that Pasi's review raises, and revise the draft in accordance with those issues you agree with.

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ippm-storetraceroutes-07 (-08)

On 2008-3-5, at 12:02, Eronen Pasi (Nokia-NRC/Helsinki) wrote: > I think you need to check this with your AD, as you need > to make sure you have WG consensus behind this change. Let's wait until we have agreement on a set of changes before worrying about whether we need to rerun WG or IETF last

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ippm-storetraceroutes-07 (-08)

On 2008-3-5, at 17:21, ext Henk Uijterwaal wrote: > So do I, but I like to see a document that passes the gen-art first. Agreed. Authors, please inform us of your timeline for having revises this document accordingly? Lars ___ Gen-art mailing list Gen

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ippm-storetraceroutes-07 (-08)

On 2008-3-31, at 21:50, ext Saverio Niccolini wrote: Can we make a summary of the open points that need to be addressed for the GEN-Art review to be passed and we can try to find an agreement? I think the ball is in your court. Pasi sent an email at March 5 that tried to clarify his concerns

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dccp-dtls-06.txt

On 2008-4-18, at 6:58, ext Phelan, Tom wrote: > Thanks -- I'll incorporate your comment in the next version :-). Since the doc is on the agenda for next week, could you send me an RFC Editor Note with the changes? Thanks, Lars ___ Gen-art mailing list

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ippm-storetraceroutes-07 (-08)

Authors, could you please respond to Pasi's suggestions and/or submit a new revision? Thanks, Lars On 2008-4-14, at 12:56, Eronen Pasi (Nokia-NRC/Helsinki) wrote: > Thomas, > > Thanks for taking the time to help with finishing this draft! > See my comments in-line: > > > About #5: TestNa

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC Review of draft-ietf-nfsv4-rpcrdma-07.txt

Hi, authors, while you're getting ready to engage with Lisa on her DISCUSS, please also review the gen-art review below and send me an RFC Editor Note with any changes you'd like to make. Lars On 2008-3-27, at 13:20, ext Eric Gray wrote: > Author(s), > > I have been selected as the General

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC Review of draft-ietf-nfsv4-rpcrdma-07.txt

t I felt the changes (between -07 and -08) addressed my > comments. > > I probably should have responded to the entire list at that > point, but did not... > > Thanks! > > -- > Eric Gray > Principal Engineer > Ericsson > >> -Original Messa

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ippm-storetraceroutes-07 (-08)

Hi, it's been two weeks since the last emails, and it's been almost half a year since this document has been pub-requested. It needs to be updated, and then it needs to go back to the WG for a last call, followed by another IETF last call, before it can go to the IESG, because of the magni

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ippm-storetraceroutes-07 (-08)

9 6221 4342-155 > Network Research Division > Kurfuersten-Anlage 36 > 69115 Heidelberg, Germanyhttp://www.nw.neclab.eu > > NEC Europe Limited Registered in England 2832014 > Registered Office: NEC House, 1 Victoria Road, London W3 6BL > >> -Original Mess

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ippm-storetraceroutes-07 (-08)

s if available >>> * Added a bunch of examples >>> >>> Please review this version thoroughly and I hope it fits all its >>> requirements now. >>> >>> Best Regards, >>> >>> Thomas >>> >>> -- >>> Thomas Die

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ippm-storetraceroutes-07 (-08)

On 2008-6-11, at 11:10, ext Henk Uijterwaal wrote: > 2. We can then start a short second WGLC. ... > Does this sound reasonable, I'd like to get this document done before > Dublin. Sounds reasonable, but depending on the magnitude of the changes, another IETF Last Call may also be required, whic

Re: [Gen-art] IPPM request publication of draft-ietf-ippm-storetraceroutes

Done! On 2008-7-4, at 11:23, ext Henk Uijterwaal wrote: Hi Lars, We put the document back in WGLC after all the changes made in the GENART review. No issues were rased, so we like to request publication of the document again. Thanks, Henk -- --

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-udp-guidelines-09

Hi, thanks for your comments! On 2008-8-12, at 15:27, ext Ben Campbell wrote: Section 3.1.1, paragraph 3: I think this paragraph may be confusing to some implementors, in that you suggest monitoring packet-loss to determine fair bandwidth competition with UDP. A few worlds elaborating on h

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-udp-guidelines-09

Hi, On 2008-8-22, at 11:16, ext Ben Campbell wrote: Section 3.1.2, paragraph 1: Should I take this to mean that implementing TFRC is insufficient for low-volume applications, and that they should follow the guidelines in this section even if they implement TFRC? If so, this conflicts with

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-tcpm-tcp-soft-errors-08.txt

Hi, I believe the gen-art comments need to be discussed before this document can move before the IESG. Lars On 2008-8-21, at 23:30, ext [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) > reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see >

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-nfsv4-pnfs-obj-09.txt

On 2008-11-27, at 23:18, Brian E Carpenter wrote: Thanks for the reminder, Brian. Authors, you will need to respond to the last call reviews for this document before it can be approved. Thanks, Lars smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___

Re: [Gen-art] gen-art review of draft-ietf-tcmp-tcp-uto-09.txt

Hi, Scott, thanks for the comments. On 2008-11-24, at 18:40, ext Scott Brim wrote: - Since a UTO can apparently be sent at any time, what happens if a UTO is received that shortens the timeout and there are unacknowledged packets that are already beyond the new timeout value? Good p

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-tcpm-tcp-soft-errors-08.txt

On 2008-12-3, at 10:47, Fernando Gont wrote: (FYI, the draft originally aimed at Std. Track, and discussed other alternative approaches for dealing with the problem of long delays between connection establishment attempts. Then we changed the draft category to "Informational", to simply document

Re: [Gen-art] Fwd: genart LC review of draft-ietf-nfsv4-rpc-netid-03.txt (and -04)

On 2008-12-5, at 1:12, Robert Sparks wrote: Regarding the latter question I looked at some registries, and these seemed to be acceptable limits. Regarding the former question, one has to have limits. What happens if someone submits a 1MB, 1GB, 1TB, etc. entry? IANA says "You've got to be kiddin

Re: [Gen-art] Fwd: genart LC review of draft-ietf-nfsv4-rpc-netid-03.txt (and -04)

and they add work for IANA (who will have to check things against those limits), which seems in conflict with your comment about not doing any reviewing below? IANA evaluated the document and is OK with it. Lars RjS On Dec 5, 2008, at 12:54 AM, Lars Eggert wrote: On 2008-12-5, at 1:12, Ro

Re: [Gen-art] Fwd: genart LC review of draft-ietf-nfsv4-rpc-netid-03.txt (and -04)

On 2008-12-10, at 10:15, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I fixed the references to obsolete standards. You fixed some, but not all. I'll leave the following (edited) RFC Editor Note in place: "Please make the following replacements to the document references: RFC2960 -> RFC4960, RFC1831 -> draft-i

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dccp-serv-codes-08

Hi, authors, this is the only IETF last call comment I have seen. It looks like changes will be required, so I'm placing this document in the Revised ID Needed state. Lars On 2009-4-15, at 2:07, black_da...@emc.com wrote: Gorry, I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-sip-connect-reuse-13.txt

On 2009-6-10, at 22:00, Suresh Krishnan wrote: * The example ephemeral ports used in section 3 (8293 & 9741) do not correspond to ephemeral ports in most well known OS implementations. Is it possible to use different example ports? RFC4727 defines port numbers for experimental use, I guess t

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART telechat review of draft-ietf-tcpm-tcp-lcd-02

Hi, authors, please check if there are any changes you want to incorporate into the document. Lars On 2010-8-25, at 13:21, Enrico Marocco 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.alvest

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC Review of draft-ietf-nsis-nslp-auth-06

Ben, thanks for the review. Editors, please respond to the points Ben raised, and see if you can improve the text. Thanks, Lars On 2010-9-1, at 1:55, Ben Campbell 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 LC Review of draft-ietf-nsis-nslp-auth-06

Hi, Roland, please respond. Otherwise this draft is unlikely to be approved on tomorrow's telechat. Thanks, Lars On 2010-9-1, at 15:13, Jukka Manner wrote: > Hi, > > Thank you for the good review, this was very helpful. > > Roland Bless is our editor, I'll let him take charge of the edits a

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC Review of draft-ietf-nsis-nslp-auth-06

Hi, where are we with regards to resolving this discuss? Lars On 2010-9-9, at 19:51, Roland Bless wrote: > Hi Russ, > > On 09.09.2010 16:56, Russ Housley wrote: >> Will any implementations be impacted? If not, we should ask the >> Security ADs for their best suggestion. > > At least we have

Re: [Gen-art] review of draft-ietf-tcpm-tcp-timestamps-02.txt

Hi, thanks for the review. Fernando, please see if you want to address any of these in your working copy. (But don't post a new revision until after the document has been discussed by the IESG.) Thanks, Lars On 2010-12-10, at 11:23, Francis Dupont wrote: > (note: I was a bit late to send the

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-6lowpan-hc-13.txt

On 2011-1-17, at 22:33, david.bl...@emc.com wrote: > There may be something special about 802.15.4 that makes this sort of > corruption less of a risk, but I strongly request that the IESG discuss > whether to change both of the above "SHOULD NOT" statements to "MUST NOT" > with an explanation o

Re: [Gen-art] Lars Eggert's Discuss on draft-ietf-6lowpan-hc-13: (with DISCUSS)

Hi, On 2011-1-18, at 20:41, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) wrote: > I'm still unhappy since the text allows a middle point to recomputed the > checksum which then might be delivered erroneously to the wrong IP or port. > This was done to ensure that a packet that flows on the Internet would 'look > r

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-dccp-tfrc-rtt-option-04.txt

Thanks for the review, Brian. Authors, please see if you want to incorporate this suggestion. Lars On 2011-3-14, at 22:33, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > Please see attached review. > > > > > > > > > > > smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC Review of draft-eggert-successful-bar-bof-06

Hi, thanks, Ben. We will incorporate most of your suggestions in the next revision. That said: On 2011-9-8, at 0:22, Ben Campbell wrote: > -- Section 6 suggests side meetings should be (somehow "informally") covered > by NOTE WELL. I think this is a very dangerous suggestion. The rest of the >

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC Review of draft-eggert-successful-bar-bof-06

We need to run this past Jorge. The gist of that section of the text basically came from an email exchange we had. I'm not at all opposed to changing it, but if we change it, Jorge needs to OK it. On 2011-9-9, at 18:36, Spencer Dawkins wrote: > Lars, > > For what it's worth, I have the same qu

Re: [Gen-art] Note Well applicability to bar BOFs

Hi, Jorge, related to the ID on side meetings during the IETF week, during the gen-art review of this draft, Ben had the following question, and Spencer followed it up: Ben said: > -- Section 6 suggests side meetings should be (somehow "informally") covered > by NOTE WELL. I think this is a ve

Re: [Gen-art] Note Well applicability to bar BOFs

Hi, Jorge, I haven't seen a response from you yet? Thanks, Lars On 2011-9-9, at 19:03, Lars Eggert wrote: > Hi, Jorge, > > related to the ID on side meetings during the IETF week, during the gen-art > review of this draft, Ben had the following question, and Spencer

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-quic-transport-32

Hi Stewart, thank you for the review. I've opened a number of GitHub issues for the points you raise below, please feel free to track their resolution there. There is also a tracking milestone at https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/milestone/4. Thanks, Lars On 2020-10-28, at 14:44, Stewart B

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-quic-invariants-11

Hi Joel, thank you for the review. I've opened a GitHub issue just to track this review: https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4322 (Since no changes were requested, the issue is already closed). There is also a milestone at https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/milestone/6. Thanks, Lar

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-quic-tls-32

Hi Gyan, thanks for the review! Since the QUIC WG uses a Github Workflow I've created a separate issue for each of the items in your review and tagged you in it, see in-line responses for the precise issue link. All issues are tracked in the milestone https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/miles

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-quic-qpack-19

Hi Linda, thanks for the review! Since the QUIC WG uses a Github Workflow I've created a separate issue for each of the items in your review and tagged you in it, see in-line responses for the precise issue link. All issues are tracked in the milestone https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/mile

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-ace-dtls-authorize-16

Paul, thanks for the review. I entered a No Objection ballot. Lars > On 2021-3-19, at 16:37, 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

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-registry-04

Elwyn, thanks for the review. I entered a Discuss ballot based on my own review. Lars On 2021-3-5, at 17:12, Elwyn Davies via Datatracker wrote: > > Reviewer: Elwyn Davies > Review result: Ready with Issues > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Review Team (

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ecrit-location-profile-registry-policy-01

Suhas, thanks for the review. I entered a No Objection ballot. Lars On 2021-3-19, at 16:03, Suhas Nandakumar via Datatracker wrote: > > Reviewer: Suhas Nandakumar > Review result: Ready > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all

Re: [Gen-art] [tcpm] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-tcpm-2140bis-09

Theresa, thank you for your review and thank you all for the following discussion. I have entered a Discuss ballot for this document based on my own review. Lars > On 2021-3-18, at 21:51, Theresa Enghardt wrote: > > Hi Joe, > > Thanks for these changes, they look good to me. > > Best, > The

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-ace-oauth-params-13

Elwyn, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On 2021-3-24, at 0:53, Elwyn Davies via Datatracker wrote: > > Reviewer: Elwyn Davies > Review result: Ready > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Review Team (

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile-17

Elwyn, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars On 2021-3-24, at 0:29, Elwyn Davies via Datatracker wrote: > > Reviewer: Elwyn Davies > Review result: Ready with Nits > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Revie

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data-11

Dan, thank you for your review. I have entered a Discuss ballot for this document based on my own review. Lars > On 2020-12-5, at 12:05, Dan Romascanu via Datatracker > wrote: > > Reviewer: Dan Romascanu > Review result: Ready with Nits > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft.

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-tls-dtls13-41

Dan, thank you for your review and thank you all for the following discussion. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars On 2021-2-16, at 10:41, Dan Romascanu via Datatracker wrote: > > Reviewer: Dan Romascanu > Review result: Ready > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer fo

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-tls-exported-authenticator-13

Christer, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On 2020-10-28, at 10:29, Christer Holmberg via Datatracker > wrote: > > Reviewer: Christer Holmberg > Review result: Ready > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General A

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-oauth-access-token-jwt-11

Roni, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On 2021-2-7, at 11:28, 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 Te

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-originator-09

Vijay, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On 2021-4-2, at 16:54, Vijay Gurbani via Datatracker wrote: > > Reviewer: Vijay Gurbani > Review result: Ready > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Review Tea

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-acme-star-delegation-06

Suresh, thank you for your review. I have entered a Discuss ballot for this document based on my own review. Lars > On 2021-3-25, at 21:10, Suresh Krishnan via Datatracker > wrote: > > Reviewer: Suresh Krishnan > Review result: Ready with Nits > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-grow-bmp-local-rib-10

Thomas, thank you for your review and thank you all for the following discussion. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On 2021-3-20, at 12:33, Thomas Fossati via Datatracker > wrote: > > Reviewer: Thomas Fossati > Review result: Ready with Issues > > I am the assig

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-lamps-crmf-update-algs-04

Ines, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On 2021-3-26, at 17:21, Ines Robles via Datatracker wrote: > > Reviewer: Ines Robles > Review result: Ready with Nits > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Revi

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-cbor-tags-oid-05

Gyan, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On 2021-3-20, at 20:59, Gyan Mishra via Datatracker wrote: > > Reviewer: Gyan Mishra > Review result: Ready > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Review Team (G

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-oauth-jwsreq-30

Joel, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On 2020-9-24, at 23:00, Joel Halpern via Datatracker wrote: > > Reviewer: Joel Halpern > Review result: Ready > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Review Team

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-transport-encrypt-20

Joel, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On 2021-3-20, at 3:09, Joel Halpern via Datatracker wrote: > > Reviewer: Joel Halpern > Review result: Ready > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Review Team (

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-oam-req-frmwk-04

David, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On 2021-2-5, at 23:44, David Schinazi via Datatracker > wrote: > > Reviewer: David Schinazi > Review result: Ready with Nits > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Ar

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-dmarc-psd-11

Dale, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On 2021-4-6, at 3:06, Dale Worley via Datatracker wrote: > > Reviewer: Dale Worley > Review result: Ready > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Review Team (Ge

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-opsawg-tacacs-yang-09

Mohit, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On 2021-3-20, at 12:24, Mohit Sethi via Datatracker wrote: > > Reviewer: Mohit Sethi > Review result: Ready > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Review Team (

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops-05

Robert, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On 2021-2-19, at 23:57, Robert Sparks via Datatracker > wrote: > > Reviewer: Robert Sparks > Review result: Ready > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Revie

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-tls-dtls-connection-id-10

Russ, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On 2021-3-15, at 17:28, Russ Housley via Datatracker wrote: > > Reviewer: Russ Housley > Review result: Ready > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Review Team

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-idr-ext-opt-param-11

Christer, thank you for your review . I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On 2021-4-15, at 22:34, Christer Holmberg via Datatracker > wrote: > > Reviewer: Christer Holmberg > Review result: Almost Ready > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The Ge

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-dprive-xfr-over-tls-09

Dan, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On 2021-4-17, at 12:43, Dan Romascanu via Datatracker > wrote: > > Reviewer: Dan Romascanu > Review result: Ready with Nits > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-core-new-block-10

Pete, thank you for your review and thank you all for the following discussion. I have entered a Discuss ballot for this document based on my own review. Lars On 2021-4-25, at 0:33, Pete Resnick via Datatracker wrote: > > Reviewer: Pete Resnick > Review result: Ready with Issues > > I am the

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-avtcore-multi-party-rtt-mix-14

Peter, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars On 2021-5-6, at 6:41, Peter Yee via Datatracker wrote: > > Reviewer: Peter Yee > Review result: Ready with Issues > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Review Tea

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-opsawg-finding-geofeeds-06

Paul, thank you for your review and thank you all for the following discussion. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On 2021-4-29, at 19:57, Paul Kyzivat wrote: > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews al

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-bess-datacenter-gateway-10

Gyan, thank you for your review. I have not seen a response from the editors to your review yet, and so I'm holding off for the moment on entering a ballot for this document. Authors, would you please respond to Gyan's review? Thanks, Lars > On 2021-4-29, at 8:46, Gyan Mishra via Datatracker

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-babel-yang-model-09

Stewart, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On 2021-5-4, at 20:39, Stewart Bryant via Datatracker > wrote: > > Reviewer: Stewart Bryant > Review result: Ready with Nits > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-netmod-geo-location-08

Linda, thank you for your review. I have entered a Discuss ballot for this document based on my own review. Lars > On 2021-4-27, at 1:48, Linda Dunbar via Datatracker wrote: > > Reviewer: Linda Dunbar > Review result: Ready > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General A

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-bess-datacenter-gateway-10

Gyan, thank you for your review and thank you all for the following discussion. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document based on the current status of the discussion. Lars > On 2021-4-29, at 8:46, Gyan Mishra via Datatracker wrote: > > Reviewer: Gyan Mishra > Review result: No

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-6man-spring-srv6-oam-09

Matt, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On 2021-3-13, at 4:14, Matt Joras via Datatracker wrote: > > Reviewer: Matt Joras > Review result: Ready with Nits > > 1. Introduction > > As Segment Routing with IPv6 data plane (SRv6) [RFC84

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-core-senml-versions-02

Hi Elwyn, have you had a chance to check whether the -03 version of the I-D addresses your review? Thanks, Lars On 2021-5-9, at 22:51, Carsten Bormann wrote: > > Hi Elwyn, > > I finally got around to process your review. > > I have submitted a new version -03 based on this review. > I coul

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-core-senml-versions-02

Elwyn, thank you for your review and thank you all for the following discussion. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Based on my checks, the latest version addresses your review issues; please let me know if you disagree. Lars > On 2021-5-3, at 21:56, Elwyn Davies via Data

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang-02

Joel, thank you for your review and thank you all for the following discussion. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On 2021-5-14, at 23:34, Joel Halpern via Datatracker wrote: > > Reviewer: Joel Halpern > Review result: Ready with Issues > > I am the assigned Gen-A

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ntp-port-randomization-06

Meral, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On 2021-2-26, at 4:44, Meral Shirazipour via Datatracker > wrote: > > Reviewer: Meral Shirazipour > Review result: Ready > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area R

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-dots-rfc8782-bis-05

Dale, thank you for your extensive review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document based on the follow-up discussion. Lars > On 2021-3-23, at 2:42, Dale Worley via Datatracker wrote: > > Reviewer: Dale Worley > Review result: Ready with Issues > > I am the assigned Gen-ART rev

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-httpbis-messaging-16

Roni, thank you for your review. I have entered a Discuss ballot for this document, since IANA has unresolved issues. Lars > On 2021-6-9, at 12:23, Roni Even via Datatracker wrote: > > Reviewer: Roni Even > Review result: Ready > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The Gener

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-httpbis-semantics-16

Dale, thank you for your review, which I hope will see a response soon. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On 2021-6-10, at 3:51, Dale Worley via Datatracker wrote: > > Reviewer: Dale Worley > Review result: Ready with Nits > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer f

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-httpbis-cache-16

Mohit, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On 2021-5-30, at 17:14, Mohit Sethi via Datatracker wrote: > > Reviewer: Mohit Sethi > Review result: Ready with Nits > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Rev

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-payload-rtp-jpegxs-12

Russ, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On 2021-5-6, at 20:49, Russ Housley via Datatracker wrote: > > Reviewer: Russ Housley > Review result: Almost Ready > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Review

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-curdle-ssh-kex-sha2-19

Roni, thank you for your review. I have entered a Discuss ballot for this document because of an open IANA issue. Lars > On 2021-7-5, at 12:47, Roni Even via Datatracker wrote: > > Reviewer: Roni Even > Review result: Ready > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General A

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-core-yang-cbor-16

Peter, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On 2021-7-11, at 23:24, Peter Yee via Datatracker wrote: > > Reviewer: Peter Yee > Review result: Ready > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Review Team (Gen-

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-core-sid-15

Linda, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On 2021-3-16, at 19:34, Linda Dunbar via Datatracker wrote: > > Reviewer: Linda Dunbar > Review result: Not Ready > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Review

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ntp-interleaved-modes-04

Theresa, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document for now, but support Warren's Discuss and may eventually Abstain, depending on how the discussion goes. Lars > On 2021-4-7, at 4:43, Theresa Enghardt via Datatracker > wrote: > > Reviewer: Theresa Eng

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-netmod-nmda-diff-10

Matt, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On 2021-7-13, at 19:47, Matt Joras via Datatracker wrote: > > Reviewer: Matt Joras > Review result: Ready with Nits > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Review

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-6lo-plc-05

Meral, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On 2021-2-16, at 9:35, Meral Shirazipour via Datatracker > wrote: > > Reviewer: Meral Shirazipour > Review result: Almost Ready > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-policy-model-15

Francesca, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On 2020-6-16, at 21:55, Francesca Palombini via Datatracker > wrote: > > Reviewer: Francesca Palombini > Review result: Ready with Issues > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-httpbis-cache-header-08

Paul, thank you for your review and thank you all for the following discussion. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars > On 2021-7-1, at 19:55, Paul Kyzivat wrote: > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-6man-ipv6-alt-mark-06

Stewart, thank you for your review. I have entered a Discuss ballot for this document. Lars > On 2021-6-7, at 14:44, Stewart Bryant via Datatracker > wrote: > > Reviewer: Stewart Bryant > Review result: Not Ready > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Revi

  1   2   3   4   >