Please see attached review.
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.
Hi Brian,
Sorry about the delay, I had chatted with the co-authors and have been
wanting to reply to this email, but just found time.
I am enclosing the original and the responses. Responses are prefixed with ANA
for easier readability.
=== Last
Hi Wes,
In TCPM, it was determined that RFC 1122 is not wrong or flawed, just
potentially unclear.
That's a judgment call that the WG's entitled to make, of course.
(Side comment: it would be useful for reviewers outside the WG
if writeups noted why a document was in a particular category
Just commenting on the non-editorial portion:
On 6/4/2011 5:51 PM, Anantha Ramaiah (ananth) wrote:
...
Why is this Informational? If it matters, it should be a Standards Track
document updating RFC 1122.
ANA I agree, it should have been a standards track document since it
clarifies the RFC
