mohamed.boucad...@orange.com writes:
> > In section 8.3 change
> >
> > This type MUST be encoded per
> >Section 6.1.1 of [RFC7011]. Reduced-Size encoding (Section
> > 6.2 of
> >[RFC7011]) applies to this data type.
> >
> > to
> >
> >
Benoit Claise writes:
> We could potentially ask the RFC-editors to do this task? Or maybe
> they do it automatically?
I do not think they do it automatically, and usually it is better to
leave that to the experts. Some of the RFC titles are long, and people
who are experts on those protocols can
mohamed.boucad...@orange.com writes:
> > 1.1. Scope and Intended Use
> >
> >Connectivity services are provided by networks to customers
> > via
> >dedicated terminating points, such as Service Functions (SFs)
> >[RFC], Customer Edges (CEs), peer Autonomous System Border
> > ...
>
Joe Clarke \(jclarke\) writes:
> Yeah, this was new to me, too. But when logged into DT, if I go to [My Name]
> > My Reviews at the top, I can select a given review and click the correct
> review button to change the status and the revision reviewed.
We do not usually do that in secdir. The docum
Reviewer: Tero Kivinen
Review result: Has Issues
I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's
ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the
IESG. These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the
security area directors. Document ed
Reviewer: Tero Kivinen
Review result: Ready
I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's
ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the
IESG. These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the
security area directors. Document editors a
Reviewer: Tero Kivinen
Review result: Has Issues
I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's
ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the
IESG. These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the
security area directors. Document ed
Reviewer: Tero Kivinen
Review result: Has Nits
This is the re-review of the document. There are still several places where the
draft uses [RFC1234] without giving any indication what document that is,
requiring readers to have the mapping from RFC numbers to names. This will
cause extra effort
Reviewer: Tero Kivinen
Review result: Has Issues
This is YANG model providing configuration and information about Attachment
Circuits.
The section 5.2.5.5 describes the security parts, but it is mostly
content free, I mean I have no idea what it would mean if you say
encryption is enabled on L2
Reviewer: Tero Kivinen
Review result: Ready
I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's
ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the
IESG. These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the
security area directors. Document editors a
10 matches
Mail list logo
