Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-softwire-dslite-deployment-07

same IPv4 address (e.g., 192.0.0.2/32 [RFC6333]) to all AFTRs. IANA has allocated the 192.0.0.0/29 network prefix to provide IPv4 addresses for this purpose [RFC 6333]. END Thanks, --David > -Original Message- > From: Black, David > Sent: Monday, October 15, 2012 7

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-pwe3-mpls-eth-oam-iwk-07

The -07 version of this draft addresses all of the nits noted in the Gen-ART review of the -06 version. This draft is ready for publication as a Proposed Standard RFC. Thanks, --David From: Black, David Sent: Monday, August 20, 2012 9:58 PM To: dinmo...@hotmail.com; nabil.n.bi...@verizon.com

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-pkix-rfc2560bis-15

Authors, 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 receive. Document: draft-ietf-pkix-rfc2560bis-15

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-savi-threat-scope-06

tables. A paragraph has been added to 5.2.3 to address all three of the above concerns. I guess that's ok, but I would have liked to see some text pointing out that a MAC move can be detected by the switches and used to update SAVI state about which port(s) a MAC is accessed through. Thanks,

RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-savi-threat-scope-06

> Review Date: March 27, 2013 Copy/paste glitch - that should be March 25 for obvious reasons ... Thanks, --David > -Original Message- > From: Black, David > Sent: Monday, March 25, 2013 9:04 PM > To: McPherson, Danny; Fred Baker; joel.halp...@ericsson.com; gen-...@ietf

RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-savi-threat-scope-06

seen Fred's response, but that change would suffice. An RFC Editor note should suffice. Thanks, --David > -Original Message- > From: Ted Lemon [mailto:ted.le...@nominum.com] > Sent: Monday, March 25, 2013 9:38 PM > To: Black, David > Cc: McPherson, Danny; Fred Baker; j

RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-pkix-rfc2560bis-15

ed non-actions) on items [2]-[5] are fine with me, Sean's taken care of the author permissions item from idnits, and I assume someone has or will check the ASN.1 . Thanks, --David > -Original Message- > From: Stefan Santesson [mailto:ste...@aaa-sec.com] > Sent: Monday, March 25, 2

RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-pkix-rfc2560bis-15

mber of tools to prevent the client from accepting a bad certificate") seem particularly relevant. Thanks, --David > -Original Message- > From: Stefan Santesson [mailto:ste...@aaa-sec.com] > Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2013 7:44 AM > To: Black, David; s...@aaa-sec.com; mmy...

RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-pkix-rfc2560bis-15

the protocol is likely to work in practice. Thanks, --David > -Original Message- > From: Stefan Santesson [mailto:ste...@aaa-sec.com] > Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2013 11:38 AM > To: Black, David; s...@aaa-sec.com; mmy...@fastq.com; ambar...@gmail.com; > slava.galpe...@gmail.co

RE: [savi] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-savi-threat-scope-06

That would do nicely. Thanks, --David > -Original Message- > From: Joel M. Halpern [mailto:j...@joelhalpern.com] > Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2013 12:30 PM > To: Black, David > Cc: Ted Lemon; McPherson, Danny; s...@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org; gen- > a...@ietf.org;

RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-pkix-rfc2560bis-15

nsequence of not using "revoked". Thank you, --David > -Original Message- > From: Carlisle Adams [mailto:cad...@eecs.uottawa.ca] > Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2013 9:57 AM > To: 'Stefan Santesson'; Black, David; s...@aaa-sec.com; mmy...@fastq.com; >

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-pkix-rfc2560bis-16

The -16 version of this draft resolves all of the concerns raised by the Gen-ART review of the -15 version. Thanks, --David > -Original Message- > From: Black, David > Sent: Monday, March 25, 2013 8:26 PM > To: s...@aaa-sec.com; mmy...@fastq.com; ambar...@gmail.com; &

RE: [savi] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-savi-threat-scope-06

- > From: Joel M. Halpern [mailto:j...@joelhalpern.com] > Sent: Friday, March 29, 2013 6:08 PM > To: Ted Lemon > Cc: Black, David; McPherson, Danny; s...@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org; gen- > a...@ietf.org; Jean-Michel Combes; joel.halp...@ericsson.com > Subject: Re: [savi] Gen-ART revie

RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-savi-threat-scope-07

set of teamed/aggregated links - that's at best "nice to have" for this draft, but not essential. Thanks, --David > -Original Message----- > From: Black, David > Sent: Monday, March 25, 2013 9:04 PM > To: McPherson, Danny; Fred Baker; joel.halp...@ericsson.com;

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-karp-crypto-key-table-07

Document: draft-ietf-karp-crypto-key-table-07 Reviewer: David L. Black Review Date: April 25, 2013 IETF LC End Date: April 29, 2013 Summary: This draft is on the right track, but has open issues described in the review. This draft describes a conceptual key database for use by protocols. It's def

RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-karp-crypto-key-table-07

T13 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ROT13). Thanks, --David > -Original Message- > From: Sam Hartman [mailto:hartmans-i...@mit.edu] > Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2013 12:47 PM > To: Black, David > Cc: Russ Housley; tim.p...@nist.gov; zhangdach...@huawei.com; gen- > a...@ietf

Gen-ART review of draft-eastlake-rfc5342bis-02

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 receive. Document: draft-eastlake-rfc5342bis-02 Reviewer: D

Gen-ART review of draft-eastlake-rfc5342bis-03

suggest submitting a -04 version of this draft to make the necessary single character correction (e.g., as opposed to using a RFC Editor Note for that purpose). Thanks, --David > -Original Message- > From: Black, David > Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2013 6:13 PM > To: d3e...@gmail

RE: Gen-ART review of draft-eastlake-rfc5342bis-03

il.com] > Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2013 2:07 PM > To: Black, David > Cc: joe.ab...@icann.org; General Area Review Team; joe...@bogus.com; > ietf@ietf.org > Subject: Re: Gen-ART review of draft-eastlake-rfc5342bis-03 > > Hi David, > > On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Bl

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-abfab-eapapplicability-03

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 receive. Document: draft-ietf-abfab-eapapplicability-03 Rev

RE: [abfab] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-abfab-eapapplicability-03

AAA servers and EAP servers need to implement > channel binding for network access in such environments. Thanks, --David > -Original Message- > From: Sam Hartman [mailto:hartm...@painless-security.com] > Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 10:19 AM > To: Black, David > Cc: st

RE: [abfab] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-abfab-eapapplicability-03

draft. Specifically, I'm a bit unclear on "application bindings MUST be absent in network authentication" - does that mean that channel binding must be absent, or that channel binding is optional, but if channel binding is present, it MUST NOT be an "application binding", w

RE: [abfab] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-abfab-eapapplicability-03

o Any new usage of EAP MUST use channel bindings including the EAP lower-layer attribute to prevent confusion with network access usage." Thanks, --David > -Original Message- > From: Joseph Salowey (jsalowey) [mailto:jsalo...@cisco.com] &g

RE: [abfab] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-abfab-eapapplicability-03

@cisco.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 7:23 PM To: Black, David Cc: stefan.win...@restena.lu; General Area Review Team; ab...@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org Subject: Re: [abfab] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-abfab-eapapplicability-03 Thanks for the text, some revision to address On Jun 18,

Gen-ART review of draft-vegoda-cotton-rfc5735bis-02

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 receive. Document: draft-vegoda-cotton-rfc5735bis-02 Revie

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-bliss-shared-appearances-13

These resolutions have been carried forward to the -13 version of the draft. Thanks, --David > -Original Message- > From: Black, David > Sent: Friday, July 13, 2012 6:25 PM > To: Black, David; alan.b.johns...@gmail.com; mohsen.soro...@sylantro.com; > vvenka...@gmail.com; g

Gen-ART review of draft-polk-local-emergency-rph-namespace-02

;...n, this is a ...' Thanks, --David > -Original Message- > From: Black, David > Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 8:45 PM > To: James M. Polk; gen-...@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org > Cc: Black, David; Robert Sparks > Subject: Gen-ART review of draft-polk-local-emergency-rp

RE: Gen-ART review of draft-vegoda-cotton-rfc5735bis-03

The -03 version of this draft addresses the nits in the Gen-ART version of the -02 version. Section 5 has been removed in the -03 version, so the nit that was there is gone. Thanks, --David > -Original Message- > From: Black, David > Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2012 7:0

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-pwe3-mpls-eth-oam-iwk-06

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 receive. Document: draft-ietf-pwe3-mpls-eth-oam-iwk-06 Rev

RE: Proposed IETF Meeting Calendar 2018 - 2022

The first week of November dates for 2018, 2021 and 2022 are likely to conflict with T10 (SCSI storage standards body). Thanks, --David (storm WG co-chair) > -Original Message- > From: wgchairs-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:wgchairs-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf > Of IETF Administrative Director

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bis-11

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 receive. Document: draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bis-11 Reviewer: D

RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bis-11

Barry, > >> 5) Statement that the string contains an FQDN, as stated for one case of > >> the Tunnel-Client-Endpoint AVP in 4.5.4. That specific statement is > >> incomplete, as it needs to be accompanied by a normative reference to > >> a document that specifies the format of internationalized do

RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bis-11

ed on line 219, but not > > defined > > > > That's definitely a problem. Was [I-D.ietf-dime-rfc3588bis] > > intended? > > No. The passage in question is a verbatim quote from RFC 4005. Ok, just fix this so idnits can find something else to complain about :

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-softwire-dslite-deployment-06

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 receive. Document: draft-ietf-softwire-dslite-deployment-06

RE: Last Call: (iSCSI Extensions for RDMA Specification) to Proposed Standard

For those interested in what has changed in this draft by comparison to the specification of iSER in RFC 5046, here's a reasonably readable diff that shows the text changes: http://www.stiemerling.org/ietf/storm-review/diff-rfc5046-to-iser.html and the edited version of RFC 5046 on which this was

RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-softwire-dslite-deployment-06

uggest: Outgoing Policies apply to packets originating from behind the B4 with a destination on the IPv4 network. Incoming Policies apply to packets originating from the IPv4 network to a destination behind the B4. Thanks, --David > -Original Message- > From: Lee, Yiu [mailto:yiu_...@cable.comc

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-abfab-eapapplicability-04

vice other than network access. Thanks, --David > -Original Message----- > From: Black, David > Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 10:39 PM > To: stefan.win...@restena.lu; jsalo...@cisco.com; General Area Review Team > Cc: ietf@ietf.org; ab...@ietf.org; Black, David > Subj

RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-abfab-eapapplicability-05

And the -05 version includes the text to address that editorial nit - it's ready for publication as a Proposed Standard RFC. Many thanks to the authors for productively addressing the review comments. Thanks, --David > -Original Message- > From: Black, David > Sent: M

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-trill-directory-framework-05

Document: draft-ietf-trill-directory-framework-05 Reviewer: David L. Black Review Date: July 17, 2013 IETF LC End Date: July 18, 2013 Summary: This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the review. This draft describes a framework for using directory servers to provide add

RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-trill-directory-framework-05

Hi Donald, All of your responses are fine with me. Thanks, --David > -Original Message- > From: Donald Eastlake [mailto:d3e...@gmail.com] > Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 7:56 AM > To: Black, David > Cc: ldun...@huawei.com; ra...@alum.mit.edu; i...@yahoo-inc.com; General Are

RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-trill-directory-framework-06

The -06 version of this draft resolves all of the concerns raised by the Gen-ART review of the -05 version - the -06 version is ready for publication as an Informational RFC. Thanks, --David > -Original Message- > From: Black, David > Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 7:54 PM &

Gen-ART review of draft-eastlake-rfc5342bis-04

; From: Black, David > Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2013 1:47 PM > To: d3e...@gmail.com; joe.ab...@icann.org; General Area Review Team > Cc: joe...@bogus.com; ietf@ietf.org; Black, David > Subject: Gen-ART review of draft-eastlake-rfc5342bis-03 > > The -03 version of this draft reso

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-karp-crypto-key-table-08

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 wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft. Document: draft-ietf-karp-crypto-k

RE: [karp] IANA policy for draft-ietf-karp-crypto-key-table-08

imately be an issue that the IESG needs to sort out, as the level of security for IETF protocols and concerns about "vanity crypto" extend well beyond the karp WG, but discussion ought to start here. Thanks, --David > -Original Message- > From: Sam Hartman [mailto:har

RE: [karp] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-karp-crypto-key-table-08

e that the key databases at both ends of the security association return the same key? Thanks, --David > -Original Message- > From: Sam Hartman [mailto:hartmans-i...@mit.edu] > Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 3:32 PM > To: Black, David > Cc: hous...@vigilsec.com; tim.p...@nist.g

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dime-overload-reqs-10

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 receive. Document: draft-ietf-dime-overload-reqs-10 Review

RE: [karp] IANA policy for draft-ietf-karp-crypto-key-table-08

ilto:hartmans-i...@mit.edu] > Sent: Friday, August 16, 2013 2:03 PM > To: Black, David > Cc: Sam Hartman; hous...@vigilsec.com; tim.p...@nist.gov; Dacheng Zhang > (zhangdach...@huawei.com); General Area Review Team (gen-...@ietf.org); > k...@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org > Subject

RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dime-overload-reqs-10

3GPP, "Evolved Packet System (EPS); Mobility Management 1197 Entity (MME) and Serving GPRS Support Node (SGSN) related 1198 interfaces based on Diameter protocol", TS 29.272 11.4.0, 1199 September 2012. I was amused :-). Thanks, --David >

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-trill-directory-framework-07

The -07 version is also ready for publication as an Informational RFC Thanks, --David > -Original Message- > From: gen-art-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:gen-art-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of > Black, David > Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 7:20 AM > To: ldun...@huawei.com; Dona

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dime-overload-reqs-11

ursday, August 22, 2013 4:50 PM > To: Black, David > Cc: Eric McMurry; General Area Review Team (gen-...@ietf.org); ietf@ietf.org; > d...@ietf.org; bcla...@cisco.com > Subject: Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dime-overload-reqs-10 > > Hi David, > > We agree on all your po

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dime-overload-reqs-12

And the -12 version is likewise ready for publication as an Informational RFC. Thanks, --David > -Original Message- > From: Black, David > Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 12:41 PM > To: Ben Campbell > Cc: Eric McMurry; General Area Review Team (gen-...@ietf.org); iet

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-threats-06

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 wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft. Document: draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-t

Transport Directorate review of: draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-mcast-14

I've reviewed this document as part of the transport area directorate's ongoing effort to review key IETF documents. These comments were written primarily for the transport area directors, but are copied to the document's authors for their information and to allow them to address any issues raised.

RE: Transport Directorate review of: draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-mcast-14

s document, RFC 4761 or RFC 4762). Thanks, --David > -Original Message- > From: Yakov Rekhter [mailto:ya...@juniper.net] > Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 10:27 AM > To: Black, David > Cc: tsv-...@ietf.org; raggarw...@yahoo.com; y.kam...@ntt.com; > luf...@cisco.com; ya..

RE: Transport Directorate review of: draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-mcast-14

n black- holing VPLS multicast data and could provide opportunities for unauthorized VPLS multicast usage (e.g., exploiting traffic replication within a multicast tree to amplify a denial of service attack based on sending large amounts of traffic). Thanks, --David > -Original Message--

RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-threats-06

ore. > > I disagree, and I discussed this with Stewart previously. The reference > appears > in a quote and was appropriate at the time the quoted text was generated. Ok - I was suggesting adding an informative reference to RFC 2385, but this is a nit, and so if the responsible AD

RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-threats-06

From: Stephen Kent [mailto:k...@bbn.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 5:08 PM To: Black, David Cc: a...@cs.unc.edu; General Area Review Team (gen-...@ietf.org); stbry...@cisco.com; ietf@ietf.org; s...@ietf.org Subject: Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-threats-06 David, Since this doc lo

RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-threats-06

Sounds good - I look forward to seeing the revised draft. Thanks, --David From: Stephen Kent [mailto:k...@bbn.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2013 11:04 AM To: Black, David Cc: a...@cs.unc.edu; General Area Review Team (gen-...@ietf.org); stbry...@cisco.com; ietf@ietf.org; s...@ietf.org

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-threats-07

caching requirements. Thanks, --David > -Original Message- > From: Black, David > Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 8:25 PM > To: k...@bbn.com; a...@cs.unc.edu; General Area Review Team (gen-...@ietf.org) > Cc: Black, David; stbry...@cisco.com; ietf@ietf.org; s...@iet