Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-trill-channel-tunnel-10

Thanks again, Peter. Jari 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

[Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-trill-channel-tunnel-10

Seems like this draft has been sent back for another IETF LC. My review, below in the original message and follow-up, applies to draft -10. Since this is an LC review, the following blurb applies: I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-ice-dualstack-fairness-03

Thanks for the review. I am on paternity leave until 1.aug. Will fix the issues as soon as I get back. P?l-Erik Sent from my iPhone On 05 Jul 2016, at 17:46, Meral Shirazipour > wrote: I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for

Re: [Gen-art] A *new* batch of IETF LC reviews - 2016-07-08

The deadline for all LCs listed below has been extended to 2016-08-01 Thanks! Jean On 7/9/16 2:26 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: Last Calls ending in the middle of an IETF week? Hate to say this, but my review is not going to happen on that timescale. I thought that the IESG policy was never

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-Art review of draft-holmberg-dispatch-rfc7315-updates

Hi Ralph, ... >Yes. I had missed that 3.3.2 and 3.3.3 come from 3GPP. The doc makes perfect >sense to me now. > >Thanks for the clarification and I think the doc is ready for publication >considering our agreement on the editorial nits. Thank You! :) Regards, Christer Nits/editorial

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-Art review of draft-holmberg-dispatch-rfc7315-updates

> On Jul 12, 2016, at 7:41 AM 7/12/16, Christer Holmberg > wrote: > > Hi Ralph, > > Thanks for your comments! Please see inline. > > Minor issues: > > > I had some difficulty unraveling the relationship among the text in section > > 3.3.2, 3.3.3, 4 and RFC

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-Art review of draft-holmberg-dispatch-rfc7315-updates

Hi Ralph, Thanks for your comments! Please see inline. Minor issues: > I had some difficulty unraveling the relationship among the text in section > 3.3.2, 3.3.3, 4 and RFC 7315. Section 3.3.2 specifies the > inclusion of the NPLI option in the P-Access-Network-Info header field. > Section