Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-spfbis-experiment-09.txt

2012-06-06 Thread S Moonesamy
reads the RFCs listed as normative to understand the draft. The Experimental RFCs are not even a downward reference in this case as this draft is not being published on the Standards Track. Regards, S. Moonesamy (as document shepherd) ___ Gen-art

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-appsawg-about-uri-scheme-05

2012-06-04 Thread S Moonesamy
it to person with expertise to write the specification about that token to consider the security implications. Adding text to discuss about cross-site scripting might be misconstrued as a recommendation. Regards, S. Moonesamy ___ Gen-art mailing list Gen

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-yam-5321bis-smtp-pre-evaluation-05

2010-05-17 Thread S Moonesamy
for a summary of an analysis of the interoperability of the commands and tags. Regards, S. Moonesamy YAM WG Secretary ___ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

Re: [Gen-art] review: draft-ietf-yam-rfc1652bis-03

2010-02-28 Thread S Moonesamy
which are used here. Yes, this is to avoid gratuitous changes when advancing the specification from Draft Standard to Full Standard. Regards, S. Moonesamy ___ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art