Re: [Gen-art] [tram] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-tram-stunbis-16

On 05/14/2018 07:18 PM, Dale R. Worley wrote: > Marc Petit-Huguenin writes: >>>To do that, it follows the >>>identification procedures defined in [RFC6125], with a certificate >>>containing an identifier of type DNS-ID or CN-ID, eventually with >>>wildcards, but

Re: [Gen-art] [tram] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-tram-stunbis-16

Marc Petit-Huguenin writes: >>To do that, it follows the >>identification procedures defined in [RFC6125], with a certificate >>containing an identifier of type DNS-ID or CN-ID, eventually with >>wildcards, but not of type SRV-ID or URI-ID. >> >> The meaning of

Re: [Gen-art] [tram] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-tram-stunbis-16

Thank you. See inline. On 05/03/2018 06:32 PM, Dale R. Worley wrote: > Marc Petit-Huguenin writes: >> Because we believe that this is a problem that will become more and >> more frequent, we decided to fix it, at least for new implementations. >> >> Please have a look

Re: [Gen-art] [tram] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-tram-stunbis-16

Marc Petit-Huguenin writes: > Because we believe that this is a problem that will become more and > more frequent, we decided to fix it, at least for new implementations. > > Please have a look at -17 and let us know what you think of it. It looks like you've handled the

Re: [Gen-art] [tram] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-tram-stunbis-16

On 04/16/2018 02:49 PM, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote: > Thanks again for the review. Comments inline. > > On 03/30/2018 04:45 AM, Dale Worley wrote: >> Reviewer: Dale Worley >> Review result: Ready with Nits >> >> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area >> Review Team

Re: [Gen-art] [tram] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-tram-stunbis-16

Marc Petit-Huguenin writes: > I did some research and you were right, starting from the left side is > more common. My main counter-example is in fact in STUN itself as > figure 3: > >0 1 >2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3

Re: [Gen-art] [tram] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-tram-stunbis-16

On 04/22/2018 07:12 PM, Dale R. Worley wrote: > My apologies for not responding to this sooner: > > Marc Petit-Huguenin writes: >>> 17.1. STUN Security Features Registry >>> >>>A STUN Security Feature set defines 24 bit as flags. >>> >>>IANA is requested to

Re: [Gen-art] [tram] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-tram-stunbis-16

My apologies for not responding to this sooner: Marc Petit-Huguenin writes: >> 17.1. STUN Security Features Registry >> >>A STUN Security Feature set defines 24 bit as flags. >> >>IANA is requested to create a new registry containing the STUN >>Security

Re: [Gen-art] [tram] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-tram-stunbis-16

Dale, thanks for your reviews. Marc, thanks for your response. I have entered a No Objection ballot. Alissa > On Apr 16, 2018, at 5:49 PM, Marc Petit-Huguenin > wrote: > > Thanks again for the review. Comments inline. > > On 03/30/2018 04:45 AM, Dale Worley wrote:

Re: [Gen-art] [tram] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-tram-stunbis-16

Thanks again for the review. Comments inline. On 03/30/2018 04:45 AM, Dale Worley wrote: > Reviewer: Dale Worley > 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