Hi Russ,
thanks for the review.
Inline you can find our propose changes in order to fix the issues.
Let us know if such proposed changes are sufficient.
ciao
Luigi
> On 14 Oct 2015, at 18:50, Russ Housley wrote:
>
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
> Gen
HI Meral,
> On 02 Feb 2016, at 02:14, Meral Shirazipour
> wrote:
> [
[snip]
>
> Minor issues:
>
> Nits/editorial comments:
> - Ref [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt], please update to version 06
Will do.
> - Please verify if ok to have the draft listed as Informational. Should it be
> Standa
Hi Peter,
Back in April we indeed did not sent you a specific feedback.
Reason is that we received several comments/reviews and batched everything in a
new I-D, with sending specific feedback to all.
Yet, if you are unsatisfied on how we addressed the issues we certainly need to
do more work.
> On 08 Feb 2016, at 12:17, Luigi Iannone wrote:
>
> Hi Peter,
>
> Back in April we indeed did not sent you a specific feedback.
> Reason is that we received several comments/reviews and batched everything in
> a new I-D, with sending specific feedback to all.
>
her appearance in the body of the document
>> and the definition of these terms does not inform a reading of the body of
>> the document. I'd recommend dropping the appendix and elsewhere in the
>> document throwing in a pointer to RFC 6830.
>>
>>
This is a fair poi
ehalf
of the former, for the duration of the experiment and following the
procedures outlined in Section 10. Therefore, this document has no
IANA actions.
> On 20 Feb 2016, at 04:29, Peter Yee wrote:
>
> Luigi,
> Sorry for the tardy reply. My comments below are
Hi Peter,
did you get any chance to have a look at my comments?
ciao
L.
> On 24 Feb 2016, at 17:30, Luigi Iannone wrote:
>
> Hi Peter,
>
> since we cleared the minor issues we can move to the major issues.
>
> The IANA Consideration section was not exactly an exa
gt; Luigi,
> Please see my responses below prefixed with PEY>.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Kind regards,
> -Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Luigi Iannone [mailto:g...@gigix.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2016 8:31 AM
>
Hi Steward,
see inline….
On 24 Aug 2018, at 12:58, Stewart Bryant wrote:
>
> 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 Cha
Hi,
may be we do not need a state anything with respect of 6833bis.
Looking at the IANA considerations section of both 8113bis and 6833bis, they
just request IANA to rename/allocate something in an existing registry.
In particular, 8113bis does not extend/update nothing in 6833bis.
IMHO we jus
Hi Christer,
Thanks for the review.
As a shepherd I have a couple of comments inline.
> On 11 Apr 2022, at 22:35, Christer Holmberg via Datatracker
> wrote:
>
> Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
> Review result: Ready with Issues
>
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General A
Hi Paul,
Thank you a lot for your review.
Please find comment s directly inline.
Please let us know if you agree with the proposed changes.
Ciao
L.
> -Original Message-
> From: Paul Kyzivat
> Sent: Tuesday, 30 April 2024 01:06
> To: draft-ietf-6lo-path-aware-semantic-addressing@
Hi Joel,
Thanks for your review of the GAAO document.
We just submitted a new revision addressing your comments.
Please see inline.
> -Original Message-
> From: Joel Halpern via Datatracker
> Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2025 10:20 PM
> To: gen-art@ietf.org
> Cc: 6...@ietf.org; draft-ietf-6
13 matches
Mail list logo
