Reviewers for 2004-10-28


Updated 2:26:12 EDT, October 22, 2004


2. Protocol Actions

Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a
reasonable basis on which to build the salient part of the Internet
infrastructure? If not, what changes would make it so?"

         

2.1 WG Submissions

         

2.1.1 New Item

     

Area

Date

APP

MIME-based Secure Peer-to-Peer Business Data Interchange over the Internet Using HTTP (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 11

draft-ietf-ediint-as2-17.txt [Open Web Ballot]

Token:

Scott Hollenbeck

Review

John Loughney



SUB

Use of PE-PE GRE or IP in BGP/MPLS IP VPNs (Proposed Standard) - 2 of 11

draft-ietf-l3vpn-gre-ip-2547-03.txt [Open Web Ballot]

Note: 2004-10-21: Ready for IESG review.

Token:

Thomas Narten

Review

Lucy Lynch



OPS

Oct 21

Diameter Extensible Authentication Protocol (EAP) Application (Proposed Standard) - 3 of 11

draft-ietf-aaa-eap-09.txt [Open Web Ballot]

Token:

Bert Wijnen

Review

Mark Allman



SUB

Oct 20

Link Management Protocol Management Information Base (Proposed Standard) - 4 of 11

draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-mib-10.txt [Open Web Ballot]

Token:

Bert Wijnen

Review

Mary Barnes



TSV

Update to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Preconditions Framework (Proposed Standard) - 5 of 11

draft-ietf-sip-rfc3312-update-03.txt

Token:

Allison Mankin

Review

Spencer Dawkins



RTG

Source-Specific Multicast for IP (Proposed Standard) - 6 of 11

draft-ietf-ssm-arch-06.txt [Open Web Ballot]

Token:

Alex Zinin

Review

Brian Carpenter



INT

IP Tunnel MIB (Proposed Standard) - 7 of 11

draft-ietf-ipv6-inet-tunnel-mib-03.txt [Open Web Ballot]

Token:

Margaret Wasserman

Review

Joel Halpern



INT

Management Information Base for the User Datagram Protocol (UDP) (Proposed Standard) - 8 of 11

draft-ietf-ipv6-rfc2013-update-04.txt [Open Web Ballot]

Token:

Margaret Wasserman

Review

John Loughney



INT

Experimental Message, Extension and Error Codes for Mobile IPv4 (Proposed Standard) - 9 of 11

draft-ietf-mip4-experimental-messages-02.txt [Open Web Ballot]

Note: 2004-10-21: ready for IESG review.

Token:

Thomas Narten

Review

Lucy Lynch



SEC

The Use of Galois/Counter Mode (GCM) in IPsec ESP (Proposed Standard) - 10 of 11

draft-ietf-ipsec-ciph-aes-gcm-00.txt [Open Web Ballot]

Token:

Russ Housley

Review

Mary Barnes



INT

Rapid Commit Option for DHCPv4 (Proposed Standard) - 11 of 11

draft-ietf-dhc-rapid-commit-opt-05.txt [Open Web Ballot]

Token:

Margaret Wasserman

Review

Spencer Dawkins



2.1.2 Returning Item
      NONE

2.2 Individual Submissions

         

2.2.1 New Item

     

Area

Date

APP

Internationalized Resource Identifiers (IRIs) (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 3

draft-duerst-iri-10.txt [Open Web Ballot]

Token:

Ted Hardie

Review

Brian Carpenter



OPS

Oct 21

Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) Scheme for the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) (Proposed Standard) - 2 of 3

draft-black-snmp-uri-08.txt [Open Web Ballot]

Note: IESG, please make sure to review revision 8!

Token:

Bert Wijnen

Review

Joel Halpern



OPS

Terminology for Describing Internet Connectivivy (BCP) - 3 of 3

draft-klensin-ip-service-terms-04.txt

Token:

David Kessens

Review

John Loughney



2.2.2 Returning Item
      NONE

3. Document Actions

         

3.1 WG Submissions

Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a reasonable
contribution to the area of Internet engineering which it covers? If
not, what changes would make it so?"

         

3.1.1 New Item

     

Area

Date

RTG

Requirements for Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Routing for Automatically Switched Optical Network (ASON) (Informational) - 1 of 5

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ason-routing-reqts-05.txt [Open Web Ballot]

Token:

Alex Zinin

Review

Michael Patton



RTG

Requirements for Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Signaling Usage and Extensions for Automatically Switched Optical Network (ASON) (Informational) - 2 of 5

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ason-reqts-07.txt [Open Web Ballot]

Token:

Alex Zinin

Review

Lucy Lynch



TSV

Transcoding Services Invocation in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Using Third Party Call Control (3pcc) (Informational) - 3 of 5

draft-ietf-sipping-transc-3pcc-02.txt

Token:

Allison Mankin

Review

Mary Barnes



APP

A Presence Architecture for the Distribution of GEOPRIV Location Objects (Informational) - 4 of 5

draft-ietf-geopriv-pres-02.txt [Open Web Ballot]

Token:

Ted Hardie

Review

Spencer Dawkins



OPS

IPv6 Host Configuration of DNS Server Information Approaches (Informational) - 5 of 5

draft-ietf-dnsop-ipv6-dns-configuration-04.txt [Open Web Ballot]

Token:

David Kessens

Review

Brian Carpenter



3.1.2 Returning Item

     

Area

Date

INT

Extensions to support efficient carrying of multicast traffic in Layer-2 Tunneling Protocol (L2TP) (Experimental) - 1 of 1

draft-ietf-l2tpext-mcast-05.txt [Open Web Ballot]

Note: 2004-10-12: -05 is out; ready for IESG review.

Token:

Thomas Narten

Review

Brian Carpenter



3.2 Individual Submissions Via AD

Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a reasonable
contribution to the area of Internet engineering which it covers? If
not, what changes would make it so?"

         

3.2.1 New Item

     

Area

Date

GEN

RFC 1888 is obsolete (Informational) - 1 of 3

draft-carpenter-obsolete-1888-01.txt [Open Web Ballot]

Token:

Margaret Wasserman

Review

Joel Halpern



GEN

BinaryTime: An alternate format for representing date and time in ASN.1 (Experimental) - 2 of 3

draft-housley-binarytime-02.txt [Open Web Ballot]

Token:

Steve Bellovin

Review

John Loughney



OPS

Threats relating to IPv6 multihoming solutions (Informational) - 3 of 3

draft-nordmark-multi6-threats-02.txt [Open Web Ballot]

Token:

David Kessens

Review

Lucy Lynch



3.2.2 Returning Item

     

Area

Date

GEN

Calendar Access Protocol (CAP) (Experimental) - 1 of 1

draft-royer-calsch-cap-01.txt [Open Web Ballot]

Note: This document is the successor to the draft-calsch-cap-13. As part of the closure of the CALSCH working group, the chairs, author, and I agreed that it should go forward as experimental to document the point the group reached.

Token:

Ted Hardie

Review

Joel Halpern



3.3 Individual Submissions Via RFC Editor

Reviews should focus on these questions: "Does this document
represent an end run around the IETF's working groups
or its procedures? Does this document present an incompatible
change to IETF technologies as if it were compatible?" Other
matters may be sent to the RFC Editor in private review.

         

3.3.1 New Item
      NONE
3.3.2 Returning Item
      NONE