Re: IETF Diversity

Hi Phil, On 06/18/2013 02:08 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > When I make a statement at the microphone and then have multiple people > come to thank me afterwards for making that point I don't consider it > pontificating. > > I do however consider your own response to be an example of the type

Diversity: Call for community input

o the diversity design team at diversity...@ietf.org . You can provide **anonymous** feedback by contacting either of the design team leads Suresh Krishnan and Kathleen Moriarty who will anonymize it for the rest of the members. Thanks Suresh Krishnan & Kathleen Moriarty for the diversity de

Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-intarea-nat-reveal-analysis-05

Hi Peter, Thanks a lot for your review. I will ask the authors to address your comments in the next version of the draft. Regards Suresh On 03/09/2013 03:13 AM, Peter Yee wrote: > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on > Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at >

Re: Barely literate minutes

On 11/29/2012 05:27 PM, Randy Bush wrote: >> As a document author, I've learned that I need to have a friend take >> good notes for me, because all of the great comments I get at the mike >> are lost otherwise. > > this gap makes me crazy, so much is often lost. but i do not think > technology or

Re: NomCom: Call for Nominations - IAOC Mid-Term Vacancy

Hi Eric, On 11/20/2012 10:20 AM, Eric Gray wrote: > I think this is a point of confusion, anyway. > > > > I thought the process was for the previous NomCom to be coopted to > address any > > unexpected mid-term vacancies, rather than to add the burden to the current > > NomCom. The previous

Re: Change in I-D announcement format

Hi Tom, On 10/24/2012 09:28 AM, t.p. wrote: And now there seems to be another unannounced change, in that in addition to the usual announcement format e-mails, there may also be, or may not be, the appearance seems random, of Not so random. I noticed that the "New Version Notification" mails a

Re: Last Call: (The Line Identification Destination Option) to Experimental RFC

Hi Med, On 06/06/2012 08:04 AM, mohamed.boucad...@orange.com wrote: > Dear Suresh, all, > > Even if the document includes several warnings about the unreliability of an > RS-based mechanism, I suggest to add a pointer to the following document: > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dec-6man-rs-acce

Re: NomCom 2011-2012 feedback

Hi John, Thanks for your comments. Please see my response inline. On 11-11-01 04:48 PM, John C Klensin wrote: > > > --On Sunday, October 30, 2011 23:01 -0400 Suresh Krishnan > wrote: > >>> I noticed that the term "transparency of the process" onl

Re: NomCom 2011-2012 feedback

Hi SM, On 11-10-29 11:14 AM, SM wrote: > Dear 2011-2012 nominating committee members, > > You requested feedback from the IETF community for positions on the > IESG, IAB and IAOC. As none of the candidates shared their views > about a simple question that was asked on the IETF mailing list, I

Re: Nomcom

Hi John, Just responding to one specific concern (No. 3) you raised. I do believe that the other 3 (Nos. 1, 2 and 4) require process changes that cannot take place during the current nomcom cycle. On 11-10-27 11:25 AM, John C Klensin wrote: > ...snipped... > (3) I don't believe it has happened t

Re: What? This thread is talking about *voting* now?

Hi SM, On 11-10-27 08:09 AM, SM wrote: > This year's NomCom has members from: > > North America 5 > Cisco.com2 > Juniper.net 2 > Avaya.com1 > > Europe 2 > Nokia.com1 > NLnetlabs.nl 1 > > Asia 3 > Huawei.com

Re: Last Call: (Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifier for Proxy Mobile IPv6) to Informational RFC

Hi Sri, On 11-09-21 08:44 PM, Sri Gundavelli wrote: > Two MAG's in the same broadcast domain can be ruled out, as there is no > mechanism for the nodes to decide on who should support the attached MN. > More over, we still have the P2P link assumption and so multiple MAG's in > the same broadcast

Re: Last Call: (Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifier for Proxy Mobile IPv6) to Informational RFC

Hi Sri, On 11-09-19 01:29 PM, Sri Gundavelli wrote: > Hi Jari: > > In case of PMIPv6, we need the interface ID allocation for PMIv6 > domain-wide usage. We may not be able tie this to a specific EUI-64 > identifier derived from a MAC identifier of any individual MAG hosting this > configuration.

Re: Last Call: (Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifier for Proxy Mobile IPv6) to Informational RFC

Hi Jari, On 11-09-19 02:35 AM, Jari Arkko wrote: > Following up with a personal comment. > > The draft allocates an interface ID and an EUI-64 MAC identifier from the > IANA block. These are two separate, unrelated allocations. > > The main criticism in RFC 5453 for making additional interface

Re: Last Call: (Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifier for Proxy Mobile IPv6) to Informational RFC

Hi Alex, On 11-07-29 09:02 AM, Alexandru Petrescu wrote: I do think that pmipv6 has some issues about how it does mag-mn interface. One solution to one issue may be this reserved iid. Is this updating the stds track rfc5453 "reserved iids"? No. It does not. RFC5453 explicitly sets up an IANA

Nomcom 2011-2012: Second Call for Volunteers

Thank you in advance for your participation. Suresh Krishnan Nomcom Chair 2011-2012 Email: nomcom-ch...@ietf.org, suresh.krish...@ericsson.com ___ IETF-Announce mailing list ietf-annou...@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iet

Nomcom 2011-12: Call for Volunteers

n the next few days. Thank you in advance for your participation. Suresh Krishnan Nomcom Chair 2011-2012 Email: nomcom-ch...@ietf.org, suresh.krish...@ericsson.com ___ IETF-Announce mailing list ietf-annou...@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman

Re: Review of draft-ietf-dna-simple

Hi Bernard, On 10-08-19 06:00 PM, Bernard Aboba wrote: In that scenario, it makes sense to me. However, if the RA advertises the same prefixes would there be a reason to mark all addresses as inoperable? The reason I changed it to do it this way was to simplify RA processing. Now, the RA g

Re: secdir review of draft-ietf-csi-send-cert-03

Hi Richard, Removing the stuff we agreed upon. On 10-05-31 08:22 PM, Richard L. Barnes wrote: Hey Suresh, Most of these comments look OK to me. Couple of responses inline. --Richard Sec 6 Para 4 The requirement for RFC 3779 extension seems to contradict the use of ETAs as Trust Anchor M

Re: Gen-ART review of draft-krishnan-v6ops-teredo-update-06

Hi Jari, Thanks for your comments. On 10-05-31 06:08 AM, Jari Arkko wrote: Thanks for your review! I have added the following RFC Editor notes as fixes: Please add "Updates: RFC 4380" to the header. Please change s/RA/Router Advertisement (RA)/ on first occurrence. Similarly for s/RS

Re: secdir review of draft-ietf-csi-send-cert-03

Hi Richard, Thanks a lot for your extensive review. Please find responses inline. Richard Barnes wrote: I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG. These comments were written primarily for the

Re: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-csi-send-cert

Hi Roni, Thanks a lot for the review. Please find responses inline. Roni Even wrote: Comments: The first two comments are about changes from RFC 3971, if they are intentional it may be good to have a section on changes from RFC 3971 and list these specific changes with backward interoperabi

Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-csi-send-cert (Certificate profile and certificate management for SEND) to Proposed Standard

Hi Jim, I think you are commenting on the wrong document. You probably meant to comment on draft-housley-cms-content-constraints-extn whose last call period ended on April 19th. Thanks Suresh On 10-05-06 12:06 AM, Jim Schaad wrote: I have the following comments on this document 1.

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-csi-send-cert

Hi Roni, Thanks for the review. Please see responses inline. On 10-05-02 03:50 AM, Roni Even wrote: The first two comments are about changes from RFC 3971, if they are intentional it may be good to have a section on changes from RFC 3971 and list these specific changes with backward interoper

Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-csi-send-cert (Certificate profile and certificate management for SEND) to Proposed Standard

Hi Sean, I will make the changes to the IANA considerations section like you suggested. I think it adds clarity about the required assignment. On 10-05-01 06:56 AM, Sean Turner wrote: Suresh, 4.c) Was there discussion about support for the anyExtendedKeyUsage OID from 4.2.1.12 of RFC 5280?

Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-csi-send-cert (Certificate profile and certificate management for SEND) to Proposed Standard

Hi Sean, Thanks for the comments. Please see responses inline. On 10-04-30 03:16 PM, Sean Turner wrote: The IESG wrote: The IESG has received a request from the Cga & Send maIntenance WG (csi) to consider the following document: - 'Certificate profile and certificate management for SEND '

Re: xml2rfc 1.34 on Ubuntu

Hi Melinda, On 10-02-04 11:25 AM, Melinda Shore wrote: Suresh Krishnan wrote: If you are one of the persons who were frustrated waiting for the "new" 1.34 version of xml2rfc to get into the Ubuntu disribution channels, I'm unclear on this - why wouldn't they pick it

xml2rfc 1.34 on Ubuntu

Hi Folks, If you are one of the persons who were frustrated waiting for the "new" 1.34 version of xml2rfc to get into the Ubuntu disribution channels, you can pick it up from the debian ftp registry at http://ftp.debian.org/debian/pool/non-free/x/xml2rfc/xml2rfc_1.34-1_all.deb Cheers Suresh

Re: Review of draft-ietf-dna-simple-09

Hi Bernard, Thanks for your comments. Please find responses inline. On 09-10-20 04:08 PM, Bernard Aboba wrote: Review of draft-ietf-dna-simple-09 I have reviewed draft-ietf-dna-simple. Overall, I believe this document still contains significant technical issues that need to be addressed be

Suggestion for draft-iab-ipv6-nat-00

Hi Dave and Lixia, I went through this document and it looks good. It provides a nice balanced viewpoint on the issues. One thing I would like to be added into the document is a cost-benefit analysis of doing ipv6 NAT for each of the problems in section 2. e.g. Avoid renumbering Benefit: Don

Re: Repair of Public Mail List Archives Complete

Hi Tom, On 17/03/09 05:34 AM, Tom.Petch wrote: Alexa I noticed the lists were down and would normally have flagged it, as many another organisation knows. I did not do so partly because of the usual problem of where to flag it but more because what is the point? These are not so much archives

Re: Guidelines for authors and reviewers

Hi Ted, Ted Hardie wrote: > At 10:55 AM -0700 6/3/08, Suresh Krishnan wrote: >> ***START OF TEXT >> 4.2 Recipients of the review >> >> The list of recipients of the review is tricky to get right. The main >

Re: Guidelines for authors and reviewers

Hi Paul, Paul Hoffman wrote: >> Agree. And this topic (the recipient list of the review) is something >> I think hard about before I send out any review. > > That's good to hear, but I didn't see it reflected in the document; > maybe your co-authors had a different slant. Regardless, my prefere

Re: Guidelines for authors and reviewers

Hi Paul, Thanks for the comments. Please see responses inline. Paul Hoffman wrote: > At 5:03 PM -0400 5/30/08, Suresh Krishnan wrote: >> I'm not sure if >> > that needs a separate "review netiquette RFC", IMO it should be >>> a part of the "T

Re: Guidelines for authors and reviewers

Hi Ted, Please find responses inline Ted Hardie wrote: > At 2:42 PM -0700 5/30/08, Suresh Krishnan wrote: >> I do share your sentiment, but this is not what we set out to do >> originally. We set out to document the review process(es) and provide >> some guidelines t

Re: Guidelines for authors and reviewers

Hi Ted, Thanks for your comments. Please see responses inline. Ted Hardie wrote: > I looked at it, and, while I laud any efforts to get folks to review > things effectively, I have to say that I found this to be a pretty drafty > draft. > It does not reference the Tao, 2026, or any of th

Re: Guidelines for authors and reviewers

Hi Frank, Thanks for your comments. Please see responses inline. Frank Ellermann wrote: > Suresh Krishnan wrote: > >> We would really appreciate > [...] > In the spirit of your draft: s /one an author/once an author/ ;-) Will fix :-) > > As the draft says, the

Guidelines for authors and reviewers

Hi Folks, We have written a draft describing some guidelines for authors and reviewers of internet drafts. We would really appreciate it if you can spend some time to go over it and provide comments and/or suggestions for improvement. Thanks Suresh, Pasi and Eric Original Message -

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-geopriv-radius-lo-19.txt

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for draft-ietf-geopriv-radius-lo-19.txt For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at . Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Summary: This draft is almo

Issues with Letter of Invitation for IETF72

Hi Folks, I requested a letter of Invitation for the Dublin Meeting and I noticed the following issues. * I cannot register first and then come back for the letter of invitation. I get the following error "You will need to register for the IETF meeting prior to requesting a letter of invitatio

Re: Blue Sheet Change Proposal

Hadriel Kaplan wrote: > > I think he means if the sheet is truly used for proof of presence and IPR > awareness then it's not good enough to allow name collisions. > But I don't see how blue sheets would hold any strength anyway for that > purpose, because > 1) signing doesn't mean I was ther

RFCVision (Was Re: Finding information)

Hi Willie, I came up with a tool (rfcvision) couple of years ago for personal use that did something like this. You can check it out at http://www.sureshk.com/rfcvision It is not production quality but it should help you. Let me know if you have any comments/suggestions. Cheers Suresh Wi

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-mip4-vpn-problem-solution-03.txt

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for draft-ietf-mip4-vpn-problem-solution-03.txt For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at . Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Summary: This draf

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-sipping-toip-08.txt

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for draft-ietf-sipping-toip-08.txt For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at . Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Summary: This draft is well wri

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-avt-topologies-06.txt

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for draft-ietf-avt-topologies-06.txt For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at . Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Summary: This draft is very w

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-sip-answermode-06.txt

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for draft-ietf-sip-answermode-06.txt For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at . Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Summary: This draft is ready

Re: IETF solution for pairing cellular hosts

Hi Pars, Pars Mutaf wrote: Model of operation 1. The querier user types the target user's "human name" (as if he were consulting a phonebook), or a pseudoynm. 2. The pairing request is forwarded to the target phone. How? How do you locate the target phone? Isn't this the problem we are tr

Re: IPv6 addresses really are scarce after all

Hi Phil, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote: I am pretty sure the EUI-64 requirement has been dropped. If not I can't see how the real world security practitioners are going to implement it. Stateless autoconf does not automatically imply EUI-64. There are other stateless autoconf methods that do n

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-sip-answermode-04.txt

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for draft-ietf-sip-answermode-04.txt For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at . Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Summary: This draft is almost

Re: Funding (was Re: Charging I-Ds)

Hi Itojun, How would you write documents which warn against people doing funny things? I wrote a draft about the issues with hop-by-hop options in IPv6 and cautioning against their use. I see that there are still proposals coming out which depend on new hbh options? What should I do instead o

Funding (was Re: Charging I-Ds)

Charging for IDs will kill innovation. I use IDs to float ideas which may or may not bear fruition. I would not work on these if I had to pay. I also work on things at the IETF than my employer does not sponsor. These things will get thrown out as well. Since we have started slaughtering the

Re: Annoying auto-reply messages

Hi John, John C Klensin wrote: (1) I haven't seen you sending out-of-office messages to the entire list. I don't like getting them to the author with individual postings (and it violates the standards too), but that is both more tolerable and a little more understandable. Is there a standa

Re: Nomcom 2007-8: Randomness Sources for review

Hi Lakshminath, In light of your clarifications, I have no further objections. Thanks Suresh Lakshminath Dondeti wrote: Following up on this thread, if there are any objections to the randomness sources at this time (after taking my clarifications into consideration), please do let me know.

Re: Nomcom 2007-8: Randomness Sources for review

Hi Lakshminath, I think these sources are reasonable. I just require some clarification about the lottery numbers. From your examples, it was not clear to me how the lottery numbers will be entered as inputs to the 3797 algorithm. The algorithm recommends that the numbers be sorted in some order

Re: Last Call: draft-chakrabarti-ipv6-addrselect-api (IPv6 Socket API for Address Selection) to Informational RFC

Hi Vidya, (Cc:ing Julien as well) Narayanan, Vidya wrote: All, I'm passing along a comment from one of our developers. Sorry, I have not closely read the draft myself. But, if more clarification is needed, I'll be happy to get more information. In section 13, the draft describes a procedur

Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-imss-fc-fcs-mib-02.txt

Hi Keith, Please find comments inline. Thanks Suresh Without this sentence, the boilerplate implies that all of the listed keywords are present in the document. Since the boilerplate cannot be changed, the sentence was included to avoid the erroneous implication. I do not know of any draft

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-imss-fc-fcs-mib-02.txt

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for draft-ietf-imss-fc-fcs-mib-02.txt For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at . Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Summary: This draft is basic

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-l2tpext-failover-11.txt

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for draft-ietf-l2tpext-failover-11.txt For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at . Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Summary: This draft is basi

Gen-ART review of draft-daigle-unaptr-01.txt

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for draft-daigle-unaptr-01.txt For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at . Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Summary: This draft is basically re

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-radext-filter-06.txt

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for draft-ietf-radext-filter-06.txt For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at . Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Summary: This draft is basical

Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-rsvp-te-call-01.txt

Hi Adrian, Thanks for the quick response. Comments inline. Cheers Suresh Adrian Farrel wrote: Suresh, Many thanks for the review: Substantial: * General comment about backward compatibility I think legacy transit nodes resetting the Call ID to zero on transmission is a major

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-rsvp-te-call-01.txt

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-rsvp-te-call-01.txt. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at . Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Summary: This draf

Lost Logitech headset

Hi Folks,  I lost a silver logitech headset with mic sometime this morning. If anyone found it, I would really appreciate it if you can let me know.ThanksSuresh ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf