Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC Review of draft-ietf-mptcp-api-05

2012-08-17 Thread Joe Touch
On 8/13/2012 7:14 AM, philip.eard...@bt.com wrote: Ben, Thanks for your review. The right status isn't clear-cut (I think), but when we (Chairs & Wes) discussed it, Info seemed best * mainly because precedent seems to be that API docs are informational, for example socket API extensions for

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC Review of draft-ietf-mptcp-api-05

2012-08-13 Thread Ben Campbell
On Aug 13, 2012, at 9:14 AM, philip.eard...@bt.com wrote: > Ben, > Thanks for your review. > > The right status isn't clear-cut (I think), but when we (Chairs & Wes) > discussed it, Info seemed best > * mainly because precedent seems to be that API docs are informational, for > example socket

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC Review of draft-ietf-mptcp-api-05

2012-08-13 Thread philip.eardley
Ben, Thanks for your review. The right status isn't clear-cut (I think), but when we (Chairs & Wes) discussed it, Info seemed best * mainly because precedent seems to be that API docs are informational, for example socket API extensions for SCTP http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6458/ * als

[Gen-art] Gen-ART LC Review of draft-ietf-mptcp-api-05

2012-08-10 Thread Ben Campbell
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at . Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Document: draft-ietf-mptcp-api-05 Reviewer: Ben