Francis (and Eric), Sorry, I goofed and mis-matched your assignments in the spreadsheet with those in the assignment file (the alphabetization of the file names switched the ordering in the spreadsheet). If neither of you have reviewed either of the docs yet, then please follow the spreadsheet.
Are there any other errors you're aware of? If so, please let me know - since alot of this is still manual (hopefully we'll have a tool early next year), there is lots of room for human error in the process. Thanks, Mary -----Original Message----- From: Francis Dupont [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 24, 2006 11:56 AM To: [email protected] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Gen-art] (pre)review of draft-ietf-rohc-rfc3095bis-framework-03.txt I've not yet finished to read the document but as it is derived from an RFC I don't expect to find any serious or technical issue, so IMHO the summary should be "ready"... Regards [EMAIL PROTECTED] PS (for gen-art reviewvers, in particular Eric Gray): all the lists of http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/ don't agree about next jo:, review draft-ietf-nemo-terminology-06.txt or draft-ietf-nemo-requirements-06.txt... _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
