Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-ccamp-rfc5787bis-05

Thanks Roni, Good catches. Adrian From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Roni Even Sent: 13 August 2012 22:07 To: draft-ietf-ccamp-rfc5787bis@tools.ietf.org Cc: gen-art@ietf.org; i...@ietf.org Subject: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-ccamp-rfc5787bis-05 I am

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-abfab-usecases-03.txt

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for draft-ietf-abfab-usecases-03.txt For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at . Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Summary: This draft is ready f

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-abfab-usecases-03.txt

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for draft-ietf-abfab-usecases-03.txt For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at . Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Summary: This draft is ready f

Re: [Gen-art] GenART review of draft-ietf-storm-iscsi-sam-06

David, I think that you successfully covered most of the concerns. I fully expected there to be a number of decisions that would be immutable for that reason. I'll look for the update. --Martin On 13 August 2012 14:32, Black, David wrote: > Martin, > > Thank you very much for this review - yo

Re: [Gen-art] GenART review of draft-ietf-storm-iscsi-sam-06

Martin, Thank you very much for this review - you found a number of things that need attention, but there are also a few comments that (probably unbeknownst to you) represent design decisions that cannot be revisited courtesy of the amount of deployed iSCSI "running code". Responses are inline be

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC Review of draft-ietf-mptcp-api-05

On Aug 13, 2012, at 9:14 AM, philip.eard...@bt.com wrote: > Ben, > Thanks for your review. > > The right status isn't clear-cut (I think), but when we (Chairs & Wes) > discussed it, Info seemed best > * mainly because precedent seems to be that API docs are informational, for > example socket

[Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-ccamp-rfc5787bis-05

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-ccamp-rfc5787bis-05. Re

[Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ospf-prefix-hiding-05

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-ospf-prefix-hiding-05. Review

[Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-opsawg-automated-network-configuration-04

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-opsawg-automated-network-conf

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC Review of draft-ietf-mptcp-api-05

Ben, Thanks for your review. The right status isn't clear-cut (I think), but when we (Chairs & Wes) discussed it, Info seemed best * mainly because precedent seems to be that API docs are informational, for example socket API extensions for SCTP http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6458/ * als

[Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ospf-hybrid-bcast-and-p2mp-04

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-ospf-hybrid-bcast-and-p2mp-04

[Gen-art] review of draft-ietf-ccamp-dpm-06.txt

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-ccamp-dpm-06.txt Reviewer:

[Gen-art] review of draft-sparks-genarea-mailarch-05.txt

05.txt Reviewer: Francis Dupont Review Date: 20120810 IETF LC End Date: 20120813 IESG Telechat date: unknown Summary: Ready Major issues: None Minor issues: - a very minor question: why in the search syntax is there no "NOT" operator, only "AND" and "OR"? - annoyin