[sidr] Gen-ART Review of draft-ietf-sidr-arch-11

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-sidr-arch-11 Reviewer: David

Re: [sidr] SIDR ReCharter - to capture/cover path validation work

Andrew, Comment below. Sriram > -Original Message- > From: sidr-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:sidr-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of > Andrew Lange > Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 6:17 PM > To: Sandra Murphy > Cc: sidr@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [sidr] SIDR ReCharter - to capture/cover path v

Re: [sidr] SIDR ReCharter - to capture/cover path validation work

> I interpret the proposed charter item to be asking not "if AS_B *should* in > fact be announcing which of AS_A's routes or in what form" but rather roughly > "if AS_B *did* in fact announce which of AS_A's routes and in what form". Isn't this a difference without a distinction? Let me put it

Re: [sidr] Last Call: (AnInfrastructure to

- Original Message - From: "Sean Turner" To: "Christopher Morrow" Cc: "iesg" ; "ietf" ; "t.petch" ; Sent: Monday, February 21, 2011 8:58 PM > > On Feb 21, 2011, at 1:15 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote: > > > (not speaking for the authors, just observing some... also not > > speaking as a c

Re: [sidr] SIDR ReCharter - to capture/cover path validation work

Andrew, On Feb 24, 2011, at 1:17 AM, Andrew Lange wrote: > Given the thread, I can understand your frustration. And, I could have made > myself more clear. I'll try: given the policies that AS_B might be > implementing, we cannot know for certain, without AS_B publishing their > policies, if