On 21/09/2017 12:13, Matt Griswold wrote:
> * Brian Carpenter [170918 21:44 -0700]:
>> Minor Issues:
>> -
>>
>>> 3.1.1. Maintenance Considerations
>>>
>>> Initiators of the administrative shutdown could consider using
>>> Graceful Shutdown [I-D.ietf-grow-bgp-gshut] to facilitate smo
Thanks David. That completely responds to my comments.
Regards
Brian
On 21/09/2017 10:45, Black, David wrote:
> Brian,
>
> I'm about to post the -06 version of this draft. The concern on RFC 3168
> impact of the ECN nonce removal was resolved by listing the four major
> changes (and you w
* Brian Carpenter [170918 21:44 -0700]:
> Minor Issues:
> -
>
> > 3.1.1. Maintenance Considerations
> >
> > Initiators of the administrative shutdown could consider using
> > Graceful Shutdown [I-D.ietf-grow-bgp-gshut] to facilitate smooth
> > drainage of traffic prior to session
Brian,
I'm about to post the -06 version of this draft. The concern on RFC 3168
impact of the ECN nonce removal was resolved by listing the four major changes
(and you were correct that the change to Section 20.2 is subtle - I got it
wrong on my first attempt in responding to your email). He
Dear Dale,
thanks for your remarks. As they are very sensitive in the on-going
discussion, we send you and the other reviewers some considerations about them,
in order to clarify our approach in the URN:LEX proposal.
URN:LEX has been conceived to cope with two main objectives:
- sources of la
On 9/20/17 5:57 AM, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
Since there is an IANA registry, another possibility would be to not attempt to
revise the syntax from 5322 at all.
On my memory most of new header fields are defined without extending
"optional-field" production. So people are already doing what yo
Reviewer: Robert Sparks
Review result: Ready
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.
For more informati
Thanks for doing the update.
- Stewart
On 20/09/2017 15:00, Dave Cridland wrote:
shakespeare.example is a fine domain to use - the XMPP community
(mostly due to Peter Saint-Andre) has used these inventive domains to
express examples with more clarity - montague.lit, capulet.lit, and so
on pr
shakespeare.example is a fine domain to use - the XMPP community (mostly
due to Peter Saint-Andre) has used these inventive domains to express
examples with more clarity - montague.lit, capulet.lit, and so on provide
usefully recognisable domains. But .example is just as good as .lit, and
just as c
Stewart,
These Shakespearean style addresses are conventionally used in XMPP XEPs, and I
followed that style here.
I've discussed with XMPP colleagues, and we agree that although the convention
is cool, you are right that a safe address should be used.
I have fixed this in 06, which I just sub
Reviewer: Stewart Bryant
Review result: Ready with Nits
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.
For mor
Hi Paul,
> On 19 Sep 2017, at 21:02, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
>
>> On 9/19/17 2:41 PM, Pete Resnick wrote:
>> On 19 Sep 2017, at 9:23, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
>>optional-field =/ *( approved /
>>archive /
>>control /
>>distribution /
>>expire
Hi Linda,
Thank you for your considerations.
Please see my answers inline tagged as [GF].
Best Regards,
Giuseppe
-Messaggio originale-
Da: Linda Dunbar [mailto:linda.dun...@huawei.com]
Inviato: mercoledì 20 settembre 2017 00:23
A: gen-art@ietf.org
Cc: i...@ietf.org; draft-ietf-ippm-alt-
13 matches
Mail list logo
