Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Early review of draft-ietf-6lo-path-aware-semantic-addressing-05

Hi Paul, Thank you a lot for your review. Please find comment s directly inline. Please let us know if you agree with the proposed changes. Ciao L. > -Original Message- > From: Paul Kyzivat > Sent: Tuesday, 30 April 2024 01:06 > To:

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-lisp-vendor-lcaf-09

Hi Christer, Thanks for the review. As a shepherd I have a couple of comments inline. > On 11 Apr 2022, at 22:35, Christer Holmberg via Datatracker > wrote: > > Reviewer: Christer Holmberg > Review result: Ready with Issues > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-lisp-gpe-05

Hi Steward, see inline…. On 24 Aug 2018, at 12:58, Stewart Bryant wrote: > > Reviewer: Stewart Bryant > Review result: Ready > > 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

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-06

gt; wrote: > > Luigi, > Please see my responses below prefixed with PEY>. > > Thanks. > > Kind regards, > -Peter > > -Original Message- > From: Luigi Iannone [mailto:g...@gigix.net] > Sent: Wednesday, Febru

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-06

Hi Peter, did you get any chance to have a look at my comments? ciao L. > On 24 Feb 2016, at 17:30, Luigi Iannone <g...@gigix.net> wrote: > > Hi Peter, > > since we cleared the minor issues we can move to the major issues. > > The IANA Consideration section

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-06

e former, for the duration of the experiment and following the procedures outlined in Section 10. Therefore, this document has no IANA actions. > On 20 Feb 2016, at 04:29, Peter Yee <pe...@akayla.com> wrote: > > Luigi, > Sorry for the tardy reply. My comments below are

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-06

ppendix make no other appearance in the body of the document >> and the definition of these terms does not inform a reading of the body of >> the document. I'd recommend dropping the appendix and elsewhere in the >> document throwing in a pointer to RFC 6830. >> >> This is a fa

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-06

> On 08 Feb 2016, at 12:17, Luigi Iannone <g...@gigix.net> wrote: > > Hi Peter, > > Back in April we indeed did not sent you a specific feedback. > Reason is that we received several comments/reviews and batched everything in > a new I-D, with sending specific feedb

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-06

Hi Peter, Back in April we indeed did not sent you a specific feedback. Reason is that we received several comments/reviews and batched everything in a new I-D, with sending specific feedback to all. Yet, if you are unsatisfied on how we addressed the issues we certainly need to do more work.

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-12

HI Meral, > On 02 Feb 2016, at 02:14, Meral Shirazipour > wrote: > [ [snip] > > Minor issues: > > Nits/editorial comments: > - Ref [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt], please update to version 06 Will do. > - Please verify if ok to have the draft listed as

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Review of draft-ietf-lisp-impact-04

Hi Russ, thanks for the review. Inline you can find our propose changes in order to fix the issues. Let us know if such proposed changes are sufficient. ciao Luigi > On 14 Oct 2015, at 18:50, Russ Housley wrote: > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft.