Re: [Gen-art] draft-ietf-calext-extensions-03 (was: RE: Assignments for the 2016-06-30 Telechat)
Thanks, all! Jari On 29 Jun 2016, at 17:07, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote: > Perfect timing. My only pending issue is addressed. From the Gen-ART point pf > view this document is Ready. > > Thanks and Regards, > > Dan > > >> -Original Message- >> From: Cyrus Daboo [mailto:cy...@daboo.name] >> Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 5:04 PM >> To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); A. Jean Mahoney; General Area Review Team >> Cc: draft-ietf-calext-extensions@tools.ietf.org >> Subject: Re: draft-ietf-calext-extensions-03 (was: RE: [Gen-art] Assignments >> for the 2016-06-30 Telechat) >> >> Hi Dan, >> >> --On June 29, 2016 at 1:44:03 PM + "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" >> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> There was no update to this document since my previous review. My >>> original review raised two issues - one was clarified by explanations >>> from Alexey (thanks!); the other is about the document status (should >>> it be marked as 'Updates RFC 5545'?). I did not see that addressed. It >>> would be nice to get an answer, but I do not believe this is a show-stopper. >> >> A new -04 version of the draft has just been published with your review >> issues addressed. >> >> >> -- >> Cyrus Daboo > > ___ > Gen-art mailing list > Gen-art@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail ___ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
Re: [Gen-art] draft-ietf-calext-extensions-03 (was: RE: Assignments for the 2016-06-30 Telechat)
Perfect timing. My only pending issue is addressed. From the Gen-ART point pf view this document is Ready. Thanks and Regards, Dan > -Original Message- > From: Cyrus Daboo [mailto:cy...@daboo.name] > Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 5:04 PM > To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); A. Jean Mahoney; General Area Review Team > Cc: draft-ietf-calext-extensions@tools.ietf.org > Subject: Re: draft-ietf-calext-extensions-03 (was: RE: [Gen-art] Assignments > for the 2016-06-30 Telechat) > > Hi Dan, > > --On June 29, 2016 at 1:44:03 PM + "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > There was no update to this document since my previous review. My > > original review raised two issues - one was clarified by explanations > > from Alexey (thanks!); the other is about the document status (should > > it be marked as 'Updates RFC 5545'?). I did not see that addressed. It > > would be nice to get an answer, but I do not believe this is a show-stopper. > > A new -04 version of the draft has just been published with your review > issues addressed. > > > -- > Cyrus Daboo ___ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
Re: [Gen-art] draft-ietf-calext-extensions-03 (was: RE: Assignments for the 2016-06-30 Telechat)
Hi Dan, --On June 29, 2016 at 1:44:03 PM + "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" wrote: Hi, There was no update to this document since my previous review. My original review raised two issues - one was clarified by explanations from Alexey (thanks!); the other is about the document status (should it be marked as 'Updates RFC 5545'?). I did not see that addressed. It would be nice to get an answer, but I do not believe this is a show-stopper. A new -04 version of the draft has just been published with your review issues addressed. -- Cyrus Daboo ___ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
Re: [Gen-art] draft-ietf-calext-extensions-03 (was: RE: Assignments for the 2016-06-30 Telechat)
On 29/06/2016 14:44, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote: Hi, There was no update to this document since my previous review. My original review raised two issues - one was clarified by explanations from Alexey (thanks!); the other is about the document status (should it be marked as 'Updates RFC 5545'?). I did not see that addressed. It would be nice to get an answer, but I do not believe this is a show-stopper. Hi Dan, Ben incorporated your question into his DISCUSS, so this will either be addressed or you will get an answer from author arguing otherwise. Best Regards, Alexey ___ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
[Gen-art] draft-ietf-calext-extensions-03 (was: RE: Assignments for the 2016-06-30 Telechat)
Hi, There was no update to this document since my previous review. My original review raised two issues - one was clarified by explanations from Alexey (thanks!); the other is about the document status (should it be marked as 'Updates RFC 5545'?). I did not see that addressed. It would be nice to get an answer, but I do not believe this is a show-stopper. Regards, Dan > -Original Message- > From: Gen-art [mailto:gen-art-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of A. Jean > Mahoney > Sent: Friday, June 24, 2016 1:34 AM > To: General Area Review Team > Subject: [Gen-art] Assignments for the 2016-06-30 Telechat > > > Dan Romascanu 16-06-22 draft-ietf-calext-extensions-03 ** > ___ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
