Hi Suresh,
please see inline:
On 8/14/15 05:41 , Suresh Krishnan 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 General Area director. Document editors and WG chairs
should treat th
Hi Dan,
please see inline:
On 05/10/17 13:05 , Dan Romascanu wrote:
Reviewer: Dan Romascanu
Review result: Ready with Issues
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Pl
Hi Francis,
I have included your comments in the new version (8) that has been
published.
thanks,
Peter
On 11/10/18 10:27 , Francis Dupont 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 f
Hi Pete,
please see inline:
On 16/11/18 14:45 , Pete Resnick wrote:
Reviewer: Pete Resnick
Review result: Ready with Issues
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Plea
Hi Elwyn,
please see inline:
On 06/05/2020 16:25, 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
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the I
ERLD-MSD advertisements appears on
reflection to be a more serious issue than just an editorial nit.
Regards,
Elwyn
On 07/05/2020 08:53, Peter Psenak wrote:
Hi Elwyn,
please see inline:
On 06/05/2020 16:25, Elwyn Davies via Datatracker wrote:
Reviewer: Elwyn Davies
Review result: Ready with
info is outside of the scope of
this draft and if anything needs to be added in that regard it should be
done by updating the RFC8662.
regards,
Peter
Regards,
Elwyn
Sent from Samsung tablet.
Original message
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)"
Date: 14/05/2020 21:43 (GMT+
Hi Linda,
On 28/05/2020 19:02, 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 Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat t
are
to be added, then why need a new ASLA sub-TLV?
to be able to use the existing attributes for new apps, other than RSVP-TE.
thanks,
Peter
Linda
-Original Message-
From: Peter Psenak
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2020 5:51 AM
To: Linda Dunbar ; gen-art@ietf.org
Cc: last-c...@ietf.org; l
head-end router tries to setup an RSVP-TE path via link where
RSVP-TE is not enabled it will result in the path setup failure."
Hope it makes it clear and addresses your question.
thanks,
Peter
Linda Dunbar
-Original Message-----
From: Peter Psenak
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2020 1
RSVP-TE.
thanks,
Peter
Linda Dunbar
-Original Message-
From: Peter Psenak
Sent: Monday, June 1, 2020 11:01 AM
To: Linda Dunbar ; gen-art@ietf.org
Cc: last-c...@ietf.org; l...@ietf.org;
draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Genart last call review of draft-ietf
nk TE information?
please see above.
thanks,
Peter
Thank you.
Linda
-Original Message-
From: Acee Lindem (acee)
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 6:25 AM
To: Peter Psenak (ppsenak) ; Linda Dunbar
; gen-art@ietf.org
Cc: last-c...@ietf.org; l...@ietf.org;
draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-
RSVP-TE head-end router tries
to setup an RSVP-TE path via that link it will result in the path
setup failure.
thanks,
Peter
Linda Dunbar
-Original Message-
From: Peter Psenak
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:18 AM
To: Linda Dunbar ; Acee Lindem (acee)
; gen-art@ietf.org
Cc: l
Hi Paul,
thanks for your comments, I fixed both of them.
Changes will be part of the next version.
thanks,
Peter
On 12/05/2023 16:21, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
[Resending with the the wg email address corrected]
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-AR
On 27/06/2025 08:47, Aijun Wang wrote:
Trim the unrelated contents, to reflect the key confusion:
According to the following responses, the newly defined u/up flag is
optional, and they indicate the “the reason why the unreachability was
advertised”
Then, if only the “U”flag is attached, what
Hi Bruno,
please see inline (##PP2):
On 30/06/2025 14:04, bruno.decra...@orange.com wrote:
Peter, Dale,
Please see inline [Bruno]
*From:*Peter Psenak
*Sent:* Thursday, June 26, 2025 5:04 PM
*To:* Dale Worley ; gen-art@ietf.org
*Cc:* draft-ietf-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce@ietf.org
Hi Dale,
I pushed a new version of the draft, please have a look and let me know
if you still have comments.
thanks,
Peter
On 26/06/2025 17:03, Peter Psenak wrote:
Hi Dale,
thank you for your comments, please see responses inline (look for ##PP):
I have updated the draft and attached the
17 matches
Mail list logo
