Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-cellar-ffv1-16

Hi, Joel, On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 11:17 PM Joel Halpern via Datatracker < nore...@ietf.org> wrote: > Reviewer: Joel Halpern > 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

Re: [Gen-art] [Taps] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-taps-minset-06

Hi, Michael, On Fri, Aug 31, 2018, 15:35 Michael Welzl wrote: > Hi Spencer, > > See below: > > On Aug 31, 2018, at 7:41 PM, Spencer Dawkins at IETF < > spencerdawkins.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks, Robert, for the careful read, and thanks, Michael, for th

Re: [Gen-art] [Taps] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-taps-minset-06

Thanks, Robert, for the careful read, and thanks, Michael, for the quick response. I have one thought, on Robert's last question. On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 3:37 AM Michael Welzl wrote: > Hi, > > Thank you very much for this careful review! We just posted a revision ( > -07 ) that, we believe,

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc4960-errata-06

FWIW, On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 5:33 AM Gorry Fairhurst wrote: > +1, as Chair. I see we have caused a little confusion here - The WG will > not repeat this list of changes again as a part of the new .bis document. > > There could always be potentially be further changes as the .bis > document

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc4960-errata-06

Just chiming in as AD ... On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 7:18 AM Christer Holmberg < christer.holmb...@ericsson.com> wrote: > 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

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-dscp-registry-05

Hi, Christer, On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 1:41 PM Christer Holmberg < christer.holmb...@ericsson.com> wrote: > 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

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ippm-2330-ipv6-04

. Spencer FYI – I’m taking a few days off, so replies will be delayed, like this one. regards, Al *From:* Spencer Dawkins at IETF [mailto:spencerdawkins.i...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Tuesday, May 22, 2018 11:02 AM *To:* MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) <a...@research.att.com> *Cc:* Francesca Palom

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ippm-2330-ipv6-04

re just waiting for a fairly small -05 revision to put this on a telechat, is that the way it looks to you? Spencer > Al > > > > *From:* Spencer Dawkins at IETF [mailto:spencerdawkins.i...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Tuesday, May 8, 2018 1:20 PM > *To:* Francesca Palombini <francesc

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ippm-2330-ipv6-04

Hi, draft-ietf-ippm-2330-ipv6.all, On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 2:43 AM, Francesca Palombini < francesca.palomb...@ericsson.com> wrote: > > [acm] > > We can add the pre-5378 disclaimer as a catch-all, but I doubt the > original > > authors would make any fuss about the small amount of common text

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-tram-stunbis-15

Dear Authors, Now that Last Call for this draft has ended, could you folks take a look at Dale's comments and respond? Thanks! Spencer, as responsible AD On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 11:30 AM, Dale Worley wrote: > Reviewer: Dale Worley > Review result: Ready with Issues > > I

Re: [Gen-art] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-experimentation-05

Just to end the suspense, On Sep 2, 2017 13:37, "Spencer Dawkins at IETF" < spencerdawkins.i...@gmail.com> wrote: Hi, Brian, On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 6:41 PM, Brian E Carpenter < brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 02/09/2017 09:45, Black, David wrote:

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc5405bis

Jari has been living on IANA Transition Time. You're lucky he knows what year it is. ;-) Spencer On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 10:20 AM, Black, David wrote: > Having an answer a week in advance is good ;-). Thanks, --David > > > -Original Message- > > From: Jari Arkko

Re: [Gen-art] GenART post-telechat comment on draft-ietf-tram-turn-mobility-08

I'll wait to see what Suresh thinks (we're discussing his Comment), but On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 8:44 PM, Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy) < tire...@cisco.com> wrote: > *From:* Pete Resnick [mailto:presn...@qti.qualcomm.com] > *Sent:* Tuesday, September 6, 2016 9:25 PM > *To:* IESG >

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc5405bis

Hi, Paul, On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Black, David wrote: > Paul, > > > > So, (as WG chair for this paragraph only), thank you for your input, > but this is a > > single draft for very good reasons. > > > > > > > Thanks for the explanation. The thing about genart

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Review of draft-ietf-tram-stun-path-data-03

Dear Authors, On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:09 PM, Wassim Haddad wrote: > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, > please see the FAQ at > > > Document:

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-ippm-2679-bis-03

And, for what it's worth, the responsible AD agrees with what Brian and Al are cooking up, for this draft and for RFC2680bis. Spencer On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 9:02 AM, Guy Almes gal...@tamu.edu wrote: Al, I very much agree on moving toward treating IPv6 fully as these evolve. -- Guy