Suresh Krishnan | 24 Mar 16:59 2015
Picon

Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-ospf-security-extension-manual-keying-11.txt

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.

Document: draft-ietf-ospf-security-extension-manual-keying-11.txt
Reviewer: Suresh Krishnan
Review Date: 2015-03-24
IETF LC End Date: 2015-03-25

Summary: The draft is ready for publication as Proposed Standard. All 
the issues I brought up on the -09 version have been addressed.

Thanks
Suresh
Peter Yee | 23 Mar 15:02 2015

Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-management-09

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you
may receive.

Document: draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-management-09
Reviewer: Peter Yee
Review Date: Mar-22-2015
IETF LC End Date: Mar-23-2015
IESG Telechat date: TBD

Summary: This draft is ready for publication as an Experimental RFC, but
has nits that
should be fixed before publication. [Ready with nits]

This specification defines an OAuth client configuration endpoint that be
can be used to manage dynamic client registration updates and the protocol
used to interact with it.

Major issues: None

Minor issues: None

Nits: None

Page 2, section 1, 1st paragraph, 1st sentence: change “at” to “with”.
“At” makes it sound like the client identifier is a server-only object.

(Continue reading)

Francis Dupont | 22 Mar 21:49 2015
Picon

review of draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-signaling-09.txt

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
< http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please wait for direction from your document shepherd
or AD before posting a new version of the draft.

Document: draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-signaling-09.txt
Reviewer: Francis Dupont
Review Date: 20150313
IETF LC End Date: 20150318
IESG Telechat date: unknown

Summary: Ready

Major issues: None

Minor issues: None

Nits/editorial comments:
 I read the 09 version but was too busy to prepare the IETF meeting
to send these few comments. Note I know the 10 version is available
so I adjusted by comments (i.e., I don't raise concerns about removed
or improved texts :-).

 - 2 page 4 (end node): e.g. -> e.g.,

(it seems the very few other comments no longer apply! :-)

Thanks 
(Continue reading)

Meral Shirazipour | 22 Mar 21:28 2015
Picon

Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-roll-applicability-home-building-08

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq. 

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive.

Document: draft-ietf-roll-applicability-home-building-08
Reviewer: Meral Shirazipour
Review Date: 2015-03-21
IETF LC End Date:  2015-03-23
IESG Telechat date: NA

Summary:
This draft is ready to be published as Standards Track RFC but I have some comments.

Major issues:

Minor issues:

Nits/editorial comments:
-[Page 1], "RPL" first used in title/abstract, Would be good to spell it out.
-[Page 5], Section 2, "Monitoring of functional correctness is at least as important.". As important as
what? (not clear)
-[Page 5], Section 2, "Devices typically communicate their status regularly and send alarm messages
notifying a malfunction of equipment or network."
Not clear what equipment is? network node is an equipment?
-[Page 6], Section 2.1, "for large installation"--->"for a large installation"
-[Page 8], Section 2.2.2, "fire detectors and the smoke dampers need to be put in place to meet the stringent
delay requirements."
Where can we find a value for the delay requirement of fire detectors? A value or reference would be good.
-[Page 9], Section 2.2.4,"advanced scene and group control". Not clear what "scene" means.
(Continue reading)

Martin Thomson | 21 Mar 18:52 2015
Picon

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-radext-dynamic-discovery-13

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at

<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.

Document: draft-ietf-radext-dynamic-discovery-13
Reviewer: Martin Thomson
Review Date: 2015-03-21
IETF LC End Date: 2015-03-20
IESG Telechat date: 2015-04-19

Summary: This document is of a quality I rarely see even for proposed
standard.  It is certainly fit for publication as an experimental RFC.
(In case it isn't clear, I agree with the decision to choose
experimental here, this is in a tricky area and deployment experience
will validate choices.)

Major issues: None

Minor issues:

S-NAPTR tags for RADIUS are defined, but none for Diameter.  I'm sure
this was considered, but it seems odd on first reading.

S2.1.1.2 uses SHOULD to recommend that clients retry with their other
certificates.  I'd recommend use of MAY here, unless you would like to
expand on why this a SHOULD is valuable.
(Continue reading)

Brian E Carpenter | 21 Mar 05:44 2015
Picon

Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis-03

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.

Document: draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis-03.txt
Reviewer: Brian Carpenter
Review Date: 2015-03-21
IETF LC End Date: 2015-04-08
IESG Telechat date:

Summary: Almost Ready
--------

Minor Issue:
------------

In the IANA Considerations, two new registries are created (below).
For these two registries, the Registration Procedures need to be
defined, presumably on the same model as RFC 7153.

   IANA is requested to create the "Generic Transitive Experimental Use
   Extended Community Part 2 Sub-Types" registry.  It should be seeded
   with the following Sub-Type:

   0x08 - Flow spec redirect IPv4 format.

   IANA is requested to create the "Generic Transitive Experimental Use
(Continue reading)

Black, David | 21 Mar 04:12 2015

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-tram-stun-origin-05

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at

<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.

Document: draft-ietf-tram-stun-origin-05
Reviewer: David L. Black
Review Date: March 20, 2015
IETF LC End Date: March 17, 2015

Summary: This draft is on the right track, but has open issues
 		described in the review.

This draft describes the addition of a web origin attribute to STUN and
usage of that attribute in several protocol contexts.  The draft is well-
written and easy to read.  I found one minor issue which may be editorial.

Major issues: None.

Minor issues:

Section 2.7 discusses use of multiple STUN origins with Web RTC and
concludes by imposing a "MUST" requirement on use of multiple STUN
origins with HTTP in general (use first origin, ignore others).  While
Web RTC may be the predominant or only current use of STUN and TURN with
HTTP, this "MUST" could foreclose the use of STUN origins with other
uses of HTTP.  I'm not sure what those possible future uses might be,
(Continue reading)

A. Jean Mahoney | 19 Mar 21:44 2015

A *new* batch of IETF LC reviews - 2015-03-19

Hi all,

The following reviewers have assignments:

Reviewer          LC end       Draft
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Alexey Melnikov   2015-04-08   draft-ietf-idr-ls-distribution-10

Brian Carpenter   2015-04-08   draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis-03

Christer Holmberg 2015-04-08   draft-ietf-isis-extended-sequence-no-tlv-04

Francis Dupont    2015-04-02   draft-ietf-httpauth-digest-15

Roni Even         2015-04-06   draft-ietf-appsawg-multipart-form-data-08

Tom Taylor        2015-03-30   draft-ietf-tls-sslv3-diediedie-02

I have made the assignments in the review tool:
http://art.tools.ietf.org/tools/art/genart/

And the assignments are captured in the spreadsheets:
http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/dav/genart/gen-art.html
http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/dav/genart/gen-art-by-reviewer.html

The standard template is included below.

Thanks,

Jean
(Continue reading)

A. Jean Mahoney | 12 Mar 23:27 2015

A *new* batch of IETF LC reviews - 2015-03-12

Hi all,

The following reviewers have assignments:

Reviewer          LC end       Draft
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Joel Halpern      2015-04-02   draft-klensin-smtp-521code-05

Martin Thomson    2015-03-20   draft-ietf-radext-dynamic-discovery-13

Meral Shirazipour 2015-03-23   draft-ietf-roll-applicability-home-building-08

Peter Yee         2015-03-23   draft-ietf-oauth-dyn-reg-management-09

Robert Sparks     2015-04-02   draft-ietf-httpbis-auth-info-04

Suresh Krishnan   2015-03-25   draft-ietf-ospf-security-extension-manual-keying-11 *

* 2nd LC

I have made the assignments in the review tool:
http://art.tools.ietf.org/tools/art/genart/

And the assignments are captured in the spreadsheets:
http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/dav/genart/gen-art.html
http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/dav/genart/gen-art-by-reviewer.html

The standard template is included below.

Thanks,
(Continue reading)

Tim Chown | 12 Mar 13:46 2015
Picon

Re: [dnssd] Gen-ART LC Review of draft-ietf-dnssd-requirements-04

Yep, thanks, and Stuart for proposed text.

Tim

On 12 Mar 2015, at 10:04, Jari Arkko <jari.arkko <at> piuha.net> wrote:

Big thanks for your review, Ben.

Jari

On 23 Dec 2014, at 01:40, Ben Campbell <ben <at> nostrum.com> wrote:

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at

<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.

Document: draft-ietf-dnssd-requirements-04
Reviewer: Ben Campbell
Review Date: 2014-12-22
IETF LC End Date: 2015-01-07
IESG Telechat date: (if known)

Summary: This draft is basically ready for publication as an informational RFC. Its well written and easy to understand.

Major issues:

None

Minor issues:

The acronym is a bit unfortunate. I suspect that much of the target audience already knows SSD as "solid-state drive" Of course, I don't really expect you to change it at this point in the process. :-)

Nits/editorial comments:

-- IDNits reports a couple of out-of-date references.

-- REQ2:

Am I correct in assuming that this would not apply to case C when used in zero configuration mode?


_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

_______________________________________________
dnssd mailing list
dnssd <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnssd

_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
Alexey Melnikov | 11 Mar 14:12 2015

Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-pim-rfc4601bis-04.txt

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on 
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>

Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before 
posting a new version of the draft.

Document: draft-ietf-pim-rfc4601bis-04.txt
Reviewer: Alexey Melnikov
Review Date: 2015/03/11
IESG Telechat date: 2015/03/12

Summary: This draft is ready for publication as an Internet Standard RFC.

Gmane