Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Almost 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 Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
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 Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.
For more
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
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 Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.
For more
text in the pceps draft seems to be
aligned. I guess people are aware of the security risks with early data, so no
further justification is needed :)
So, I am fine with the current text, and withdraw my minor issue Q1.
Regards,
Christer
>> On Dec 8, 2023, at 6:51 AM, Christer Holmberg via
CEPS behind the
MUST NOT?
Regards,
Christer
> On Dec 8, 2023, at 6:51 AM, Christer Holmberg via Datatracker
> wrote:
>
> Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
> Review result: Almost Ready
>
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
> Review Team (Gen-AR
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Almost 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 Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Ready with Nits
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
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
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 Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.
For more
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
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 Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.
For more
al Message-----
From: Gen-art On Behalf Of Christer Holmberg
Sent: Monday, 22 May 2023 10.48
To: Mark Nottingham
Cc: gen-art@ietf.org; HTTP APIs Working Group ; Last Call
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of
draft-ietf-httpapi-link-template-02
Hi Mark,
>>> Ah. The reason
Hi Mark,
>>> Ah. The reason is that allowing any type would require creating a
>>> mapping of current values to SF types, and there are just too many
>>> potential (and undocumented) values already in use to do this.
>>
>> I don't think that is true. Just because the Parameter syntax allows
>>
Hi Mark,
Q2_2: The text says "Parameter values MUST be Strings."
It is unclear what "Strings" means. Does it mean that parameter
values must be encoded as quoted-strings? If so, why? RFC8288 says
that parameter values can be encoded both as token and quoted-string.
>>>
Hi Mark,
Please see inline.
>> Q2_1: There is no ABNF for the header field. There are examples using
>> both quotes ("/{username}") and angle brackets
>> (), so please include the ABNF.
>
> This is a Structured Field; in the HTTP community, we've agreed that
> documenting them with ABNF is not
Hi,
In Q2_4, I note that the URIs have been replaced by fireeye URIs... Anyway, I
assume the reader will know which example in the draft I am referring to :)
Regards,
Christer
-Original Message-
From: last-call On Behalf Of Christer Holmberg
via Datatracker
Sent: Tuesday, 16 May
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Ready with Issues
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
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
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 Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.
For more
Hi,
QMa1: General
As the document defines a new error code, and define new
WWW-Authenticate parameters, should the document not be an Update to
RFC 6750?
>>> It's a good point to consider. Our rationale is that this document
>>> leverages
>>> many different
Hi,
>Thanks Christer for your thorough review!
>A new draft
>(https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-oauth-step-up-authn-challenge-12.html)
>
>reflecting changes resulting from the feedback has been published.
>Comments inline
>
Major issues:
>> QMa1: General
>>
>>As the document
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Ready with Issues
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
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Almost 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 Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Ready with Nits
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
Hi,
Thank You for addressing my comments! :)
Regards
Christer
From: Daniel Migault
Sent: Wednesday, 19 October 2022 20.27
To: Christer Holmberg
Cc: gen-art >> General area reviewing team ;
draft-ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation@ietf.org; homenet
;
er that give some examples on how they work. I am sure
call flows would make things easier to understand.
Regards,
Christer
On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 6:19 AM Christer Holmberg via Datatracker
mailto:nore...@ietf.org> > wrote:
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Ready w
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Ready with Nits
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
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Almost 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 Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Almost 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 Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments
ces https://www.w3.org/TR/2020/PR-webrtc-20201215/. I just want
to verify that there is no text etc in 8829bis that is not aligned with
20210126.
Regards,
Christer
> On Mar 29, 2022, at 6:39 AM, Christer Holmberg
> <mailto:christer.holmberg=40ericsson@dmarc.ietf.org>
Hi,
Thanks for addressing my comments, and for explaining the reason for
Experimental :)
Regards,
Christer
-Original Message-
From: Luigi Iannone
Sent: tiistai 12. huhtikuuta 2022 10.14
To: Christer Holmberg
Cc: gen-art@ietf.org; draft-ietf-lisp-vendor-lcaf@ietf.org;
last-c
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Ready with Issues
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
Hi,
A couple of comments:
First, in general, if we are going to update the reference version, we need to
verify that we don't break anything.
Second, most of the RTCWEB RFCs referencing the WebRTC spec seem to reference
*without* a version (i.e., https://www.w3.org/TR/webrtc/). Many RFCs also
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Almost 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 Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments
the same format as used in HTTP the Link header field,
>and the other as a JSON object.
>
>by:
>
>One serializes links in the same format as used in HTTP the Link header field,
>and the other serializes links in JSON.
Looks good.
Regards,
Christer
On Tue, Jan 11, 2
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Ready with Issues
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
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Ready with Nits
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
Hi,
I have removed the issues where I am ok, with no further comments, with the
reply you gave :)
>One interesting side note I have from reading the review is:
>The CoRE WG, which produced this specification, is probably best known for
>maintaining the CoAP protocol, but it also has some other
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Ready with Nits
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
Hi Nagendra,
Thank You for addressing my issues! I am happy with the outcome, and have no
further issues.
Regards,
Christer
From: Nagendra Kumar Nainar (naikumar)
Sent: tiistai 31. elokuuta 2021 23.22
To: Christer Holmberg ; gen-art@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-ospfv3-codepoint
Thank You, Ines!
Regards,
Christer
-Original Message-
From: Ines Robles via Datatracker
Sent: maanantai 9. elokuuta 2021 21.34
To: gen-art@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc8843bis@ietf.org; last-c...@ietf.org;
mmu...@ietf.org
Subject: Genart last call review of
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Almost 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 Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments
, 2021, at 10:36 AM, Christer Holmberg
mailto:christer.holmberg=40ericsson@dmarc.ietf.org>>
wrote:
[External Email. Be cautious of content]
Hi John,
>> Q1: As far as I understand, the document only defines a new BGP OPEN Optional
>> Parameter Type, but does not modify/add
Hi John,
>> Q1: As far as I understand, the document only defines a new BGP OPEN Optional
>> Parameter Type, but does not modify/add procedures in RFC 4271. So, is the
>> document really an update to RFC 4271? And, when reading RFC 5429, I cannot
>> find any text saying that new parameter types
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Almost 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 Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
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 Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.
For more
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
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 Chair. Please wait for direction from your
document shepherd or AD before posting a new
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Ready with Issues
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
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
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 Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.
For more
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Almost 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 Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Almost 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 Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments
Thank You, Alissa!
Regards,
Christer
-Original Message-
From: Alissa Cooper
Sent: torstai 13. elokuuta 2020 3.51
To: Brian E Carpenter
Cc: Christer Holmberg ; gen-art@ietf.org;
draft-ietf-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel@ietf.org; last-c...@ietf.org;
mmu...@ietf.org
Subject: Re
Will do. Thanks!
Regards,
Christer
From: Murray S. Kucherawy
Sent: torstai 16. heinäkuuta 2020 18.51
To: Christer Holmberg
Cc: Brian E Carpenter ; gen-art@ietf.org;
draft-ietf-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel@ietf.org; last-c...@ietf.org;
mmu...@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Genart last
obsoletes RFC5549, I would personally include the complete
registration text in this document - even if it is just copy/paste from RFC5549.
Regards,
Christer
-Original Message-----
From: Christer Holmberg via Datatracker
Sent: vendredi 10 juillet 2020 00:17
To: gen-art@ietf.org
Cc: draf
: maanantai 13. heinäkuuta 2020 23.52
To: Christer Holmberg ; gen-art@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel@ietf.org; last-c...@ietf.org;
mmu...@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of
draft-ietf-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel-21
Thanks Christer, that all looks good
Hi Brian,
Thank You for the review! Please see inline.
Nits:
-
>> 4.1. MSRP URI
>>
>> transport /= "dc"
>>
>> I see that RFC7977 takes a slightly different approach to updating the ABNF:
>>
>> transport = "tcp" / "ws" / 1*ALPHANUM
>>
> The advantage of listing out
>
>
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Almost 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 Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments
0e7f8a2b9=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fboucadair%2Ffilter-control%2Fblob%2Fmaster%2FChrister's%20Review.pdf
Cheers,
Med
> -Message d'origine-
> De : Christer Holmberg via Datatracker [mailto:nore...@ietf.org]
> Envoyé : samedi 6 juin 2020 11:27 À : gen-art@ietf.org Cc :
> d
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Ready with Nits
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
Hi,
The PR looks good to me! Thanks for addressing my issues! :)
Regards,
Christer
From: Yoav Weiss
Date: Thursday, 7 May 2020 at 13.02
To: Christer Holmberg
Cc: "gen-art@ietf.org" , "last-c...@ietf.org"
, HTTP Group ,
"draft-ietf-httpbis-client-hints@ietf.o
Hi Yoav,
>> I have not received the pull request yet, so I will comment only based on
>> your e-mail reply :)
>
> Apologies for the delay. PR is now up at
> https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=0a42e34e-54e25920-0a42a3d5-
>
Hi Yoav,
I have not received the pull request yet, so I will comment only based on your
e-mail reply :)
In general, I am happy with your explanations, and for most parts I think some
text giving the explanations in the draft would be useful.
---
Major issues:
MaQ1:
>> Section 2.1.
Hi,
Seems like I did a copy/paste error. Please skip Q3-Q6, the issues/questions
will come later in the review.
Regards,
Christer
On 02/05/2020, 1.44, "last-call on behalf of Christer Holmberg via
Datatracker" wrote:
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Ready w
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Ready with Issues
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
Hi Bala'zs,
Thank you for the reply and clarifications. I still have a question on Q2.
...
Q2:
>> The first line of the 2nd paragraph of the Introduction says:
>>
>> “This document describes the concepts needed by any DetNet data plane
specification…”
>>
>>
Hi Linda,
Thank You for the review! Please see inline.
>Section 1.4.1: the first paragraph is very confusing. The steps after the
>figure is much clear on what to be done. It is better to delete the the
>sub-phrase "... where the registrar informs the UAC about the
> authorization
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Ready with Nits
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
confuses me.
T140 is ONLY for real-time text. There is no "T140 audio" or "T140 video".
Regards,
Christer
Linda
From: Christer Holmberg
Sent: Friday, February 14, 2020 4:02 PM
To: Linda Dunbar ; Gunnar Hellström
; gen-art@ietf.org
Cc: last-c...@ietf.org; mmu...@ietf
Hi Linda,
>Gunnar,
I am not Gunnar, but I will reply :)
>Thank you very much for the explanation.
>
>Do you mean WebRTC data channel is used as Transport mechanism for real-time
>text, >but Audio and Video of T140 still use RTP or SRTP?
I am not sure what you mean by "Audio and Video of
Hi Linda,
Thank You for the review!
I think Gunnar has already answered your question. I have nothing to add, but I
send this reply to indicate that I have ready your review :)
Regards,
Christer
From: Linda Dunbar via Datatracker
Sent: Friday, February 14,
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Ready with Issues
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 wait for direction from your
document shepherd or AD before
Hi Valery,
>> Q1:
>>
>> The Security Considerations lists IKEv2/IPSec algorithms that are not
>> considered quantum-resistant. However, that is not mentioned anywhere
else. I
>> think it would be good to mention that in the Abstract and/or
Introduction.
>
>
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Almost 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 Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments
pull%2F50>)
> and will be incorporated into a new
>version of the document that addresses both your comments and those by Yaron
>Sheffer.
Looks good.
Regards,
Christer
On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 11:29 PM Christer Holmberg
mailto:christer.holmb...@ericsson.com>> wrote:
Hi,
>Some answers
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Ready with Issues
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
Hi Nick,
Thanks for your reply! Please see inline.
>>MIN_1:
>>The last sentence of Section 1 says that the mechanism requires TLS version
>>1.2
>>or later. Would it be useful to state that in a dedicated Applicability
>>section?
>
> I'm disinclined to include an applicability section
Hi,
My gen-art issues have been properly addressed.
Thanks!
Regards,
Christer
-Alkuperäinen viesti-
Lähettäjä: Mark D. Baushke
Lähetetty: maanantai 26. elokuuta 2019 22.08
Vastaanottaja: Christer Holmberg
Kopio: gen-art@ietf.org; cur...@ietf.org; i...@ietf.org;
draft-ietf-curdle
Hi Mark,
Section 1:
---
>> Q1_1:
>>
...elided...
>>> RFC5656 covers three specific constructions:
>>>
>>> a) Elliptic Curve Diffie-Hellman (ECDH),>
>>> b) Elliptic Curve Menezes-Qu-Vanstone (ECMQV) key agreement, and
>>> c) Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA).
>>>
Hi Mark,
Please see inline. I have removed the comments where your suggested solution is
fine and I have nothing further to say.
Nits/editorial comments:
General:
-
QGEN_1:
>> - The document uses “as discussed in”, “as defined in”, “as described”
>> in terminology. It might be
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Ready with Nits
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
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Ready with Issues
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
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
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 Chair. Please wait for direction from your
document shepherd or AD before posting a new
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Ready with Issues
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
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Ready with Issues
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
Hi,
…
>> Example: pn-prid = 00fc13adff78512
>>
>> For more information about the APNs Topic and device token:
>>
>> SB> Is the following part of the example? If so it could usefully be
>> delimited
>> SB> as such, otherwise, I don't understand why it is not a normal document
>> SB>
Hi,
Based on the gen-art comments from Stewart, I have created a pull request for
the suggested changes.
https://github.com/cdh4u/draft-sip-push/pull/31
Regards,
Christer
From: Christer Holmberg
Date: Thursday, 20 December 2018 at 17.37
To: Stewart Bryant , "gen-art@ietf.org"
Hi Stewart,
Thank You for the review! Please see inline.
>Summary: A well written document with some minor points that could use a little
>attention.
>
>Major issues: None
>
>Minor issues:
>
>In Figure 1 the following is included:
>
> REGISTER sip:al...@example.com SIP/2.0
> Via:
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
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 Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.
For more
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Ready with Issues
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
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Ready with Nits
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
Hi Tommy,
Please see inline.
Minor issues:
Q1:
>> Section 3.1 contains some SHOULD-do statements, e.g.,:
>>
>> "the initiator SHOULD also include one or more INTERNAL_IP4_DNS and
>> INTERNAL_IP6_DNS attributes in the CFG_REQUEST"
>>
>> "the initiator SHOULD also include one or more
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Ready with Nits
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
Hi Juergen,
It seems like I missed your reply earlier. Sorry for that. See inline.
>> Minor issues:
>>
>> Sometimes, when a draft updates an existing RFC, people ask whether
>> implementations not implementing the draft are still compliant with the
>> updated
>> RFC. Based on discussions, the
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Almost 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 Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments
Michael Tuexen wrote:
>>> On 7. Jun 2018, at 02:43, Christer
>>>Holmberg wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>>> Not a comment on the document, but a question/suggestion:
>>>>>
>>>>> If you want to have
uestion/suggestion :)
Regards,
Christer
>>Regards,
>>
>> Christer
>>
>> On 04/06/18 13:13, "Gen-art on behalf of Christer Holmberg"
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hi Gorry,
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
Hi Michael,
Please see inline.
>> On 4. Jun 2018, at 05:17, Christer Holmberg
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Re-sent due to wrong e-mail address.
>>
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I have also looked at this document, and there are th
Hi,
>>> The information in this document does not update RFC4640 or the Errata
>>> to that specification. The document is instead provided as input to
>>> preparation of a new document that is expected to be a standards-track
>>> replacement for RFC4960. If approved, the replacement document
working on the bis, you can map each issue to
a pull request etc.
Regards,
Christer
On 04/06/18 13:13, "Gen-art on behalf of Christer Holmberg"
wrote:
>
>Hi Gorry,
>
>...
>
>>The information in this document does not update RFC4640 or the Errata
>>
Hi Gorry,
...
>The information in this document does not update RFC4640 or the Errata
>to that specification. The document is instead provided as input to
>preparation of a new document that is expected to be a standards-track
>replacement for RFC4960. If approved, the replacement document
Re-sent due to wrong e-mail address.
>
>Hi,
>
>I have also looked at this document, and there are things that I have
>think are unclear:
>
>Q1: It is Informational, and it does not update RFC 4960. Instead, it just
>seems to list the erratas (but without even referencing them, as noted by
Hi,
I have also looked at this document, and there are things that I have
think are unclear:
Q1: It is Informational, and it does not update RFC 4960. Instead, it just
seems to list the erratas (but without even referencing them, as noted by
Paul). I think that it should be made very clear that
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
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 Chair. Please wait for direction from your
document shepherd or AD before posting a new
1 - 100 of 325 matches
Mail list logo
