Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-sipcore-rfc4244bis-callflows-06.txt

Brian, On 9/25/13 11:45 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 resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may recei

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-sipcore-rfc4244bis-callflows-06.txt

On 9/26/13 4:01 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: The writeup says "It was difficult to get adequate reviews of this document." I'd say that goes for this whole class of documents. Reviewing the details of SIP call flows is not for ordinary mortals. Well, some would argue that participation in IETF

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-kyzivat-case-sensitive-abnf-01

Thanks Brian, On 9/5/14 10:31 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 resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may

[Gen-art] A *new* batch of IETF LC reviews - 2015-05-07

viewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: IETF LC End Date: 2015-05-18 IESG Telechat date: (if known) Summary: Ready with minor issues. Major issues: None. Minor issues: * Figure 2: A few things are fuzzy about this figure: -- The meaning/purpose of the part above the "", and its rel

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-opsawg-vmm-mib-02

viewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: IETF LC End Date: 2015-05-18 IESG Telechat date: (if known) Summary: Ready with minor issues. Major issues: None. Minor issues: * Figure 2: A few things are fuzzy about this figure: -- The meaning/purpose of the part above the "", and its rel

Re: [Gen-art] A *new* batch of IETF LC reviews - 2015-05-07

(sorry - please ignore. I resent with fixed subject and distribution.) On 5/10/15 2:06 PM, Paul Kyzivat wrote: I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Please resolve

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-opsawg-vmm-mib-02

Dear Hirochika Asai, The changes you describe below will resolve my concerns. Thanks, Paul On 5/14/15 4:08 AM, Hirochika Asai wrote: Dear Paul Kyzivat, Thank you for your review. Since the Last call is in process, we do not submit the (current) revised version but reply

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-httpbis-tunnel-protocol-04

On 5/22/15 4:26 AM, Christer Holmberg wrote: Major Issues: Q1: As the ALPN header field can contain multiple, comma separated, header field values, I don’t think the ABNF is correct. It should be something like: ALPN = "ALPN":" protocol-id *(COMMA protocol-id) Yeah. The existing notation (1

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-opsawg-vmm-mib-02

ochika Asai On May 22, 2015, at 10:36 PM, joel jaeggli wrote: Hi, please do submitt 03 Also take a look at Dan Romascanu's opsdir reivew. On 5/14/15 1:08 AM, Hirochika Asai wrote: Dear Paul Kyzivat, Thank you for your review. Since the Last call is in process, we do not submit the (

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-opsawg-vmm-mib-03

wg-vmm-mib-03 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2014-06-05 IETF LC End Date: 2015-05-18 IESG Telechat date: 2015-06-11 Summary: This draft is ready for publication as a proposed standard. All of my previous comments have been addressed in correspondence. Major issues: None Minor issues: none

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-pcp-authentication-11.txt

t with some general comments, and then follow with specific comments on particular parts of the document. Thanks, Paul Kyzivat * General Comments: I assume that a reader of this document is reasonably familiar with the RFCs that specify PCP and EAP. (When I began this review, I was

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-pcp-authentication-11.txt

l, Thanks for the detailed review. Please see inline -Original Message----- From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzi...@alum.mit.edu] Sent: Saturday, June 27, 2015 2:32 AM To: draft-ietf-pcp-authentication@tools.ietf.org Cc: General Area Review Team Subject: Gen-ART Last Call review of draf

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-pcp-authentication-13.txt

. So I have not tried to discern if there are technical security holes in this specification. Thanks, Paul Kyzivat * Section 3.1: [EDITORIAL] In the following sentence: ... In the message, the Session ID and Sequence Number fields of the AUTHENTICATION Opcode are set as 0. t

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-pcp-authentication-13.txt

cate again, creating a new PA session and PA SA. Do you agree with this conclusion? If not, please explain why you think my logic is wrong. Thanks, Paul On 7/6/15 10:20 AM, Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy) wrote: Hi Paul, Please see inline -Original Message----- From: Pa

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-pcp-authentication-13.txt

Hi Sam, On 7/7/15 11:24 AM, Sam Hartman wrote: "Paul" == Paul Kyzivat writes: Paul> Do you agree with this conclusion? If not, please explain why Paul> you think my logic is wrong. I partially agree with your conclusion. I agree that we need a mechanism to resynchr

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-pcp-authentication-13.txt

Hi Tiru, While the discussion with you and Sam continues on the major points, I'll comment here on the others. I'm trimming to just the points I'm replying to. On 7/6/15 10:20 AM, Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy) wrote: [EDITORIAL] Also, I'm still troubled by: From now on, every PCP messa

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-pcp-authentication-13.txt

On 7/7/15 2:29 PM, Sam Hartman wrote: >> You seem to be thinking of authentication as something that tends >> to benefit the server. In some deployments that's certainly >> true. However, the client may gain significant benefit from: >> >> * Gaining integrity protectio

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-pcp-authentication-13.txt

On 7/7/15 9:04 PM, Sam Hartman wrote: Yes. At this point I think you and I understand what we're talking about. I haven't been involved in this doc in a while. I think we need to let Tirumaleswar comment as well as get feedback from the rest of the group. The main think I have been bringing to

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-precis-nickname-18

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at <​ http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Summary: This draft is ready for publication as a Standards Track RFC Very clean document. I looked hard for something to criticize,

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-precis-nickname-18

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at <​ http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Summary: This draft is ready for publication as a Standards Track RFC Very clean document. I looked hard for something to criticize,

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-pcp-authentication-11.txt

On 7/8/15 6:14 PM, Jari Arkko wrote: Paul: Thanks for this excellent and detailed review (and one that was truly from a generalist point of view). And Tiru, thank you for taking the comments into account. Paul, what is your opinion, has the newest draft sufficiently addressed your original co

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-pcp-authentication-13.txt

ny special attention, but I bet at least one of them does. Thanks, Paul -Tiru -Original Message- From: Sam Hartman [mailto:hartm...@painless-security.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2015 6:35 AM To: Paul Kyzivat Cc: Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy); draft-ietf-pcp- auth

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-pcp-authentication-13.txt

On 7/10/15 12:09 AM, Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy) wrote: Hi Paul, Please see inline -Original Message- From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzi...@alum.mit.edu] Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2015 8:26 PM To: Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy); Sam Hartman Cc: draft-ietf-pcp-authentication

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-josefsson-scrypt-kdf-03

uot;To be usable in PKCS#8 [RFC5208] and Asymmetric Key Packages [RFC5958] the following extension of the PBES2-KDFs type is needed." Since RFC5958 is referenced, and it obsoletes RFC5208, what is the reason for referencing both? (There is also an error about 2119, but it is bogus, trigge

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-precis-nickname-18

see the FAQ at <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-precis-nickname-18 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2015-08-28 IETF LC End Date: 2015-07-10 IESG Telechat date: 2015-09-03 Summary: Ready ___ G

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-josefsson-scrypt-kdf-03

I have had no replies on this, and just want to double check that it has been received. Thanks, Paul On 8/25/15 2:14 PM, Paul Kyzivat wrote: I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at <​ http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/a

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-v6ops-pmtud-ecmp-problem-04

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 information, please see the FAQ at

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-v6ops-pmtud-ecmp-problem-04 (resend)

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 information, please see the FAQ at

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-aqm-ecn-benefits-06

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 information, please see the FAQ at

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-aqm-ecn-benefits-06 (resend)

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 information, please see the FAQ at

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-v6ops-pmtud-ecmp-problem-04

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, pleas

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-aqm-ecn-benefits-06

I forgot to copy gen-art. Forwarded Message Subject: Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-aqm-ecn-benefits-06 Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 11:58:48 -0400 From: Paul Kyzivat To: draft-ietf-aqm-ecn-benefits@ietf.org (Unchanged from LC review.) I am the assigned Gen-ART

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-josefsson-scrypt-kdf-03

One other thing below... On 20/11/15 12:29, Simon Josefsson wrote: Executive Summary: I have submitted https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-josefsson-scrypt-kdf-04 that (hopefully) resolve the gen-art and secdir feedback. Paul Kyzivat writes: This draft is on the right track but has open i

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-josefsson-scrypt-kdf-03

I did want to comment on one other thing: >>> (Issue-4): Identifiers reused for different meanings In scrypt, "B" is an array of "p" vectors, each of which is 128*r octets. In scryptROMix, "B" is a single vector of 128*r octets. In scryptBlockMix, "B" is a vector of 2*r 64-octet blocks. I'm

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-dat-metric-08

, please see the FAQ at <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-dat-metric-08 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: TBS IETF LC End Date: 2015-11-23 IESG Telechat date: 2015-12-03 Summary: This draft is basically ready for publication

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-dat-metric-08

The remedies below seem ok to me. One comment inline. On 11/24/15 8:16 AM, Henning Rogge wrote: Am 20.11.2015 um 21:41 schrieb Paul Kyzivat: * Section 1: "Appendix A contains a few possible steps to improve the DAT metric." This is the first occurrence of the "DAT" acron

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-dat-metric-08

Henning, On 11/24/15 10:09 AM, Henning Rogge wrote: Am 24.11.2015 um 16:00 schrieb Paul Kyzivat: So you are saying they are mutually exclusive: HELLO message by 9.4, all other packets by 9.3. Can you make the text clearer about this. As written it still could be interpreted as applying 9.3 to

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-dat-metric-08

eading this may well not find it at all confusing. Nevertheless, see inline. On 11/25/15 2:05 AM, Henning Rogge wrote: Am 24.11.2015 um 17:32 schrieb Paul Kyzivat: OK. But my confusion remains, because there seem to be duplicate actions in both 9.3 and 9.4 that ought not be done twice. In p

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-dat-metric-08

Henning, OK. I'm now happy with -10. Thanks, Paul On 11/26/15 7:30 AM, Henning Rogge wrote: Am 25.11.2015 um 16:11 schrieb Paul Kyzivat: Henning, I'm not trying to second guess the intent. My issues are solely with the presentation. And clearly this is not a s

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-dat-metric-10

see the FAQ at <​ http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-dat-metric-10 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2015-12-03 IETF LC End Date: 2015-11-23 IESG Telechat date: 2015-12-03 Summary: This draft is basically ready for publication

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-isis-prefix-attributes-03

ttp://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-isis-prefix-attributes-03 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2015-12-28 IETF LC End Date: 2016-01-01 IESG Telechat date: 2016-01-07 Summary: This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the review. Ma

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-isis-prefix-attributes-03

. -Original Message- From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzi...@alum.mit.edu] Sent: Monday, December 28, 2015 11:18 AM To: draft-ietf-isis-prefix-attributes@ietf.org Cc: General Area Review Team Subject: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-isis-prefix-attributes-03 I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-isis-prefix-attributes-03

see the FAQ at <​ http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-isis-prefix-attributes-03 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2015-12-28 IETF LC End Date: 2016-01-01 IESG Telechat date: 2016-01-07 Summary: There has been no new version since my LC review

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-isis-prefix-attributes-03

Hi Les, Trimming to the relevant points: On 1/3/16 9:27 AM, Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) wrote: Note that at the end of the day my comments are just suggestions. You can act on them or not. They only become binding if the IESG decides to raise them. [Les:] I want you to know that I take your comm

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-isis-prefix-attributes-03

regarding the proposed changes) Thanx. Les -Original Message- From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzi...@alum.mit.edu] Sent: Sunday, January 03, 2016 12:49 PM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); draft-ietf-isis-prefix-attributes@ietf.org Cc: General Area Review Team Subject: Re: Gen-ART Last Call

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-isis-prefix-attributes-04

see the FAQ at <​ http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-isis-prefix-attributes-04 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2015-12-28 IETF LC End Date: 2016-01-01 IESG Telechat date: 2016-01-07 Summary: The -04 version addressed my LC comments on t

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-behave-ipfix-nat-logging-06

ttp://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-behave-ipfix-nat-logging-06 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: IETF LC End Date: 2016-02-12 IESG Telechat date: Summary: This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the review. Major: 3 Minor: 5 Ni

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-ntp-checksum-trailer-04

ttp://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-ntp-checksum-trailer-04 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2016-02-23 IETF LC End Date: 2016-03-01 IESG Telechat date: 2016-03-03 Summary: This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the review. Ma

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-ntp-checksum-trailer-04

se for the reader to figure out how to do this) but having it ensures that developers get it right. Is there a reason why [NTP-Ext] doesn't also pick that up from the erratam? (Of course that has no bearing on *this* draft.) Thanks, Paul -Original Message- From: Pa

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-ntp-checksum-trailer-04

Hi Tal, On 2/28/16 1:31 AM, Tal Mizrahi wrote: Hi Paul, Isn't this serious? IIUC in many (most?) cases the transmitters and intermediate nodes won't know if the receiver supports [NTP-Ext]. Inserting this for those that don't will deny them of the time they are looking for. Shouldn't there

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-ntp-checksum-trailer-04

es unknown extensions, it may still find fault with the message and ignore it. Perhaps plausible implementations won't have such problems. But it would be worth mentioning. Thanks, Paul Thanks, Tal. -Original Message----- From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzi...@alum.mit.ed

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-ntp-checksum-trailer-04

ementation that complies to the corrected text (from the erratum) will not run into this problem. OK, sorry. I keep forgetting about the erratum. So I'm good with this now. Thanks, Paul Regards, Tal. -Original Message----- From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzi...@alu

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-ntp-checksum-trailer-05

see the FAQ at <​ http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-ntp-checksum-trailer-05 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2016-03-02 IETF LC End Date: 2016-03-01 IESG Telechat date: 2016-03-03 Summary: The -05 version addressed my LC comments on t

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-tls-chacha20-poly1305-04

I should have read all my mail before replying. On 3/29/16 5:50 PM, Robert Sparks wrote: On 3/29/16 4:31 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote: Hi Roni, and gen-art (other cc's dropped) So, a gen-art question to the gen-art reviewers :-) What is the criterion for major issue? The judgement of the revi

[Gen-art] What is the criterion for major issue?

[Changing the subject line] On 3/29/16 5:31 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote: Hi Roni, and gen-art (other cc's dropped) So, a gen-art question to the gen-art reviewers :-) What is the criterion for major issue? I have also wondered about this. So far I have just been "winging" it, but I continue t

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-alakuijala-brotli-08

ttp://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-alakuijala-brotli-08 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2016-02-23 IETF LC End Date: 2016-04-08 IESG Telechat date: 2016-04-21 Summary: This draft has serious issues, described in the review, and needs to be rethought. Major: 1

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-alakuijala-brotli-08

, using RFC2119 language, and with "Intended Status: Standards Track". Thanks, Paul Kind Regards, Zoltan On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 9:02 PM, Paul Kyzivat mailto:pkyzi...@alum.mit.edu>> wrote: I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Re

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-alakuijala-brotli-08

see the FAQ at <​ http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-alakuijala-brotli-08 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2016-04-19 IETF LC End Date: 2016-04-08 IESG Telechat date: 2016-04-21 Summary: This draft has serious issues, described in the review, and

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-idr-route-oscillation-stop-02

ttp://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-idr-route-oscillation-stop-02 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2016-04-27 IETF LC End Date: 2016-04-29 IESG Telechat date: 2016-05-05 Summary: This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the review.

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-alakuijala-brotli-09

see the FAQ at <​ http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-alakuijala-brotli-09 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2016-04-28 IETF LC End Date: 2016-04-08 IESG Telechat date: 2016-05-05 Summary: This draft has serious issues, described in the review, and

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc5405bis

ttp://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc5405bis Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2016-04-27 IETF LC End Date: 2016-05-31 IESG Telechat date: Summary: This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the review. Issues: (Note: I am

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc5405bis

anticipate all the possibilities.) Thanks, Paul (3) NITs Thanks for noticing these nits - they will all be fixed. Thanks, --David (as draft shepherd). -Original Message- From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzi...@alum.mit.edu] Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2016 2:23 PM To: draft-i

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-trill-ia-appsubtlv

ttp://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-trill-ia-appsubtlv Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2016-06-27 IETF LC End Date: 2016-06-28 IESG Telechat date: 2016-07-07 Summary: This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the review. This is

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-trill-ia-appsubtlv [RESEND]

last call comments. For more information, please see the FAQ at <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-trill-ia-appsubtlv Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2016-06-27 IETF LC End Date: 2016-06-28 IESG Telechat date: 2016-07-07 Summary: This draf

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-trill-ia-appsubtlv

Donald, On 7/4/16 5:26 PM, Donald Eastlake wrote: Hi Paul, Thanks for your comments. Sorry for the delay in response. Please see below. No problem. I was just concerned that my review hadn't been received. On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 6:46 PM, Paul Kyzivat wrote: I am the assigned Ge

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-trill-ia-appsubtlv

hanks, Paul Thanks, Donald === Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA d3e...@gmail.com On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 6:50 PM, Paul Kyzivat wrote: Donald, On 7/4/16 5:26 PM, Donald Eastlake wrote: Hi Paul, Thank

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-trill-ia-appsubtlv

hanks, Donald === Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA d3e...@gmail.com On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 9:32 AM, Paul Kyzivat wrote: On 7/4/16 11:35 PM, Donald Eastlake wrote: Hi Paul, I believe we are generally in agre

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-trill-ia-appsubtlv

On 7/6/16 5:18 PM, Donald Eastlake wrote: Hi Paul, On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 1:34 PM, Paul Kyzivat wrote: Donald, On 7/5/16 9:51 PM, Donald Eastlake wrote: Hi Paul, Version -09 has been uploaded with the intent that it resolve your comments. Looks good except for one thing: Some of the

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-art LC review: draft-ietf-dnsop-maintain-ds-03

(Just to Gen-art) Wow. I don't understand how you arrived at that summary. Based on the rest of the review I was expecting to be at least Not Ready. Are my standards wrong? Thanks, Paul On 7/8/16 4:32 PM, Robert Sparks wrote: I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-clue-datachannel-13

On 7/27/16 7:39 PM, Brian E Carpenter 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 treat these comments just like any other last call comments. For more informat

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-bess-ir-04

ttp://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-bess-ir-04 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2016-08-09 IETF LC End Date: 2016-08-10 IESG Telechat date: 2016-08-18 Summary: Unfortunately, I don't have the expertise to review this draft. (Of the review summaries avai

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-bess-ir-04

On 8/15/16 2:50 PM, Eric C Rosen wrote: Thanks for your review. On 8/9/2016 4:41 PM, Paul Kyzivat wrote: it will be unlikely that a new implementer, schooled in the subject matter, will be able to create a correct implementation. The material in this draft describes running code. There are

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-bess-ir-05

see the FAQ at <​ http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-bess-ir-05 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2016-08-15 IETF LC End Date: 2016-08-10 IESG Telechat date: 2016-08-18 Summary: Unfortunately, I don't have the expertise to review this

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-softwire-unified-cpe-04

see the FAQ at <​ http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-softwire-unified-cpe-04 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: IETF LC End Date: 2016-08-25 IESG Telechat date: ? Summary: This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-softwire-unified-cpe-04

Med, Thanks. Those changes seem fine. Paul On 8/23/16 3:47 AM, mohamed.boucad...@orange.com wrote: Dear Paul, Thank you for the review. Please see inline. Cheers, Med -Message d'origine- De : Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzi...@alum.mit.edu] Envoyé : mardi 23 août 2016 00

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-softwire-unified-cpe-06

see the FAQ at <​ http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-softwire-unified-cpe-06 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: IETF LC End Date: 2016-08-25 IESG Telechat date: 2016-09-29 Summary: This draft is ready for publication as a Standards Tra

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-opsawg-capwap-alt-tunnel-08

ttp://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-opsawg-capwap-alt-tunnel-08 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2016-09-30 IETF LC End Date: 2016-09-30 IESG Telechat date: Not yet Summary: This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the review. G

[Gen-art] Telechat review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc5405bis-18

, please see the FAQ at <​http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc5405bis-18 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2016-10-07 IETF LC End Date: 2016-05-31 IESG Telechat date: 2016-10-13 Summary: This draft is basically ready for publication, but ha

Re: [Gen-art] Telechat review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc5405bis-18

On 10/12/16 12:55 AM, Eggert, Lars wrote: Hi, thanks for the review! On 2016-10-11, at 21:21, Paul Kyzivat wrote: (1) NIT: "RTT" is used without definition. (There used to be a definition but it has been removed.) I think this can be addressed by an RFC Editor Note. Sure.

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-opsawg-capwap-alt-tunnel-08

, please see the FAQ at <​http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-opsawg-capwap-alt-tunnel-08 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2016-10-21 IETF LC End Date: 2016-09-30 IESG Telechat date: 2016-10-27 Summary: (Note: the document is unchanged since last ca

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-l2tpext-keyed-ipv6-tunnel-07

ttp://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-l2tpext-keyed-ipv6-tunnel-07 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2016-10-26 IETF LC End Date: 2016-10-28 IESG Telechat date: 2016-11-03 Summary: This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the

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

, please see the FAQ at <​http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-l2tpext-keyed-ipv6-tunnel-07 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2016-10-26 IETF LC End Date: 2016-10-28 IESG Telechat date: 2016-11-03 Summary: This draft is on the right track but ha

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-behave-ipfix-nat-logging-11

, please see the FAQ at <​http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-behave-ipfix-nat-logging-11 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: IETF LC End Date: 2016-02-12 IESG Telechat date: 2016-12-01 Summary: This draft is on the right track but has open issues, des

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-6lo-privacy-considerations-04

ttp://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-6lo-privacy-considerations-04 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2016-11-28 IETF LC End Date: 2016-11-30 IESG Telechat date: 2016-12-01 Summary: This draft is ready for publication as an Informational RFC. Issues: IdNits rep

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-oauth-amr-values-04

ttp://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-oauth-amr-values-04 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2016-12-11 IETF LC End Date: 2016-12-13 IESG Telechat date: Summary: This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the review. It is generall

Re: [Gen-art] email notifications in review tool?

On 12/16/16 5:47 PM, A. Jean Mahoney wrote: You can configure Datatracker to send you a reminder about any outstanding reviews by going to the bottom of the following page: ​ https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/genart/reviews/ Click the "Change Settings" button. I find no "Change Settings" butt

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l3-topology-08

ttp://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l3-topology-08 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2017-01-13 IETF LC End Date: 2017-01-17 IESG Telechat date: Summary: This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the review. Disclaim

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-oauth-amr-values-05

, please see the FAQ at <​http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-oauth-amr-values-05 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2017-01-26 IETF LC End Date: 2016-12-13 IESG Telechat date:2017-01-32 Summary: This draft is on the right track but has open

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-oauth-amr-values-05

. Ultimately it is up to the IESG and IANA to decide if they want to allow this variant procedure. Thank you, Paul Kyzivat Thank you, -- Mike -----Original Message- From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzi...@alum.mit.e

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-oauth-amr-values-05

Paul -- Mike -Original Message----- From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzi...@alum.mit.edu] Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2017 12:28 PM To: Mike Jones ; draft-ietf-oauth-amr-values@ietf.org Cc: General Area Review Team Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-oauth-amr-values-05

Jari On 26 Jan 2017, at 22:05, Paul Kyzivat wrote: On 1/26/17 3:48 PM, Mike Jones wrote: The designated experts are subscribed to the review mailing list. Either IANA or individuals can send (or forward) requests to it. There have been cases where IANA has directly received requests, which

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-bchv-rfc6890bis-04

ttp://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-bchv-rfc6890bis-04 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2017-02-28 IETF LC End Date: 2017-03-10 IESG Telechat date: Summary: Ready with Issues General Comments: It seems that the primary intent of this document is simply to clarif

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-mmusic-dtls-sdp-22

ttp://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-mmusic-dtls-sdp-22 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2017-03-27 IETF LC End Date: 2017-04-06 IESG Telechat date: TBD Summary: This draft is basically ready for publication, but has some minor issues and nits that should be

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-mmusic-dtls-sdp-22

Hi Christer, [trimming] On 3/27/17 7:42 PM, Christer Holmberg wrote: Hi Paul, Thanks for your review! Please see inline. (1) Nit: Regarding the following in section 5.1: When an offerer or answerer indicates that it wants to establish a new DTLS association, it needs to make sure tha

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-mmusic-dtls-sdp-22

On 3/28/17 10:40 AM, Christer Holmberg wrote: Hi, ... (3) Minor: I concur with the comments in the ops-dir review by Carlos Pignataro regarding the formatting of section 9. He didn't suggest a fix. Perhaps some special marker (e.g. "|" or "<" and ">") can be placed in every line to indicate

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-bchv-rfc6890bis-06

, please see the FAQ at <​http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-bchv-rfc6890bis-06 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2017-04-22 IETF LC End Date: 2017-03-10 IESG Telechat date: 2017-04-25 Summary: This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nit

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-bchv-rfc6890bis-06

On 4/25/17 8:20 AM, Brian Haberman wrote: Hi Paul, On 4/22/17 3:23 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 IESG for the IETF Chair. Please wait for direction from your

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-sipcore-content-id-06

On 6/23/17 10:53 AM, Elwyn Davies wrote: 2. If a message of a kind that can legitimately have a Content-ID arrives with a Content-ID (or indeed any Content-*) header but no message-body, presumably one would send a 400 error with a suitable reason phrase. I think it would be worth being expl

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-baeuerle-netnews-cancel-lock-05

, please see the FAQ at <​http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-baeuerle-netnews-cancel-lock-05 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2017-04-22 IETF LC End Date: 2017-06-28 IESG Telechat date: TBD Summary: This draft is on the right track but has open

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-baeuerle-netnews-cancel-lock-05

of the draft. For more information, please see the FAQ at <​http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-baeuerle-netnews-cancel-lock-05 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2017-06-23 IETF LC End Date: 2017-06-28 IESG Telechat date: TBD Summary: This draft

  1   2   3   >