> On Aug 26, 2016, at 1:10 AM, Brian E Carpenter
> wrote:
>
> 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 wait for direction from your
> document shepherd or AD be
> On Jul 5, 2016, at 11:54 AM, Brian E Carpenter
> wrote:
>
> 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 com
> On Jan 22, 2016, at 6:11 PM, Tom Haynes wrote:
>
> Hi Elwyn,
>
> Comments inline,
>
> Hi Andy,
>
> Look for [Andy]
>
>> On Jan 16, 2016, at 12:09 PM, Elwyn Davies wrote:
>>
>> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
>> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF do
x27;m afraid I misunderstood the implications (or
> otherwise) of the discussions of multiple principals. As you say,
> minorversion2 doesn't use the multiprincipal option.
At one time, NFSv4.2 did use the multi-principal assertion…...
—>Andy
>
> Regards,
> Elwyn
>
't it?
>
> In this case, there is no need to join the telechat.
OK. I’ll provide an updated doc
—>Andy
>
> Thanks,
>
> Martin
>
>
> Am 20.01.16 um 20:49 schrieb Adamson, Andy:
>>
>>> On Jan 16, 2016, at 1:15 PM, Elwyn Davies wrote:
&g
on the rp_name string marked as
> 'human readable' would be desirable.
>
> Nits/editorial comments:
> None
>
>
> [1]
> > From: Nico Williams
> > Subject: Re: rpcsec-gssv3
> > Date: January 11, 2016 at 8:01:52 PM EST
> > To: Benjamin
> On Jan 5, 2016, at 12:31 PM, Elwyn Davies wrote:
> Hi.
>
> One oops: The comment for rpcsec-gssv3 should apply to s2.7.1.4 and not
> s2.3.1.4.
No problem - I noticed that.
>
> On 04/01/2016 16:44, Adamson, Andy wrote:
>>> On Jan 1, 2016, at 7:18 PM, El
simply construct it using the parent context as the seq_num must be
>>from the GSS3 context. --AA]]
>>
>>
>
>
> On 04/01/2016 20:08, Adamson, Andy wrote:
>>> On Jan 1, 2016, at 7:33 PM, Elwyn Davies
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> One p
mean?
>
> I have sent some thoughts on the structured privileges in a separate email
> copied to you and Tom.
Yep. Got it.
—>Andy
>
> Regards,
> Elwyn
>
>
>
> On 22/12/2015 16:23, Adamson, Andy wrote:
>>> On Dec 22, 2015, at 6:33 AM, Elwyn Davies
ew
—>Andy
>
> I spotted a nit in this area that I missed on the previous pass:
> s4.10.1.1, para 3: s/This features allow/This feature allows/
>
> I also missed a number of instances (17, I think) of the "we "
> construction familiar from scientific papers.
> (Ther
> On Dec 22, 2015, at 10:30 AM, Adamson, Andy
> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Dec 18, 2015, at 11:28 PM, Tom Haynes
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Dec 13, 2015, at 11:22 AM, Elwyn Davies wrote:
>>>
>>> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for
. I will
> ask him whether my inferences are correct. If so the ref needs updating,
> probably to include the JCS doc.
OK. I’ll speak with Tom.
>
> There are a couple of other points below.
>
> On 15/12/2015 20:13, Adamson, Andy wrote:
>>> On Dec 10, 2015, at 2:
> On Dec 18, 2015, at 11:28 PM, Tom Haynes
> wrote:
>
>
>> On Dec 13, 2015, at 11:22 AM, Elwyn Davies wrote:
>>
>> 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. Pleas
> On Dec 10, 2015, at 2:48 PM, Elwyn Davies wrote:
>
> 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.
>
Hi Elwyn
Thanks for the review. I submitted the IANA request (IANA #884160) today. I
will address the rest of the issues asap.
—>Andy
> On Dec 10, 2015, at 2:48 PM, Elwyn Davies wrote:
>
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all
15 matches
Mail list logo
