Hi Al, yes, that is much better IMHO. Regards Brian
On 17/12/2015 01:48, MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) wrote: > Thanks for your review, Brian. I propose: > > We note that [I-D.chen-ippm-coloring-based-ipfpm-framework] proposes > a method similar to [I-D.tempia-opsawg-p3m], as ippm-list discussion > revealed. > > hope that does it, > Al > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2015 8:43 PM >> To: [email protected]; General Area Review >> Team >> Subject: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-ippm-active-passive-04 >> >> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area >> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed >> by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just >> like any other last call comments. >> >> For more information, please see the FAQ at >> <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. >> >> Document: draft-ietf-ippm-active-passive-04.txt >> Reviewer: Brian Carpenter >> Review Date: 2015-12-16 >> IETF LC End Date: 2015-12-24 >> IESG Telechat date: >> >> Summary: Almost ready >> -------- >> >> Minor Issue: >> ------------ >> >> We note that [I-D.chen-ippm-coloring-based-ipfpm-framework] proposes >> a method similar to [I-D.tempia-opsawg-p3m], and ippm-list discussion >> indicates [I-D.chen-ippm-coloring-based-ipfpm-framework] may be >> covered by the same IPR as [I-D.tempia-opsawg-p3m]. >> >> I suggest removing the IPR comment. It may be an issue, but not for this >> draft. We generally avoid taking a position on IPR applicablity (in >> fact, >> our lawyer tells us not to do so). _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
