Subject: [Gen-art] A *new* batch of IETF LC reviews - 2012-12-27

From: "A. Jean Mahoney" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2012 18:21:42 -0600

Hi all,

The following reviewers have assignments:

Reviewer           LC end      Draft

Dan Romascanu     2013-01-07   draft-ietf-sipcore-priority-00

Francis Dupont    2013-01-24   draft-laurie-pki-sunlight-05

Joel Halpern      2013-01-17   draft-higgs-oipf-urn-00

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

-------------------------------------------------------------------

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:
Reviewer:
Review Date:
IETF LC End Date:
IESG Telechat date: (if known)

Summary:

Major issues:

Minor issues:

Nits/editorial comments:

---

From: "Joel M. Halpern" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2012 20:06:15 -0500

Document: draft-higgs-oipf-urn-00.txt
     A Uniform Resource Name (URN) Namespace for the Open IPTV Forum
                                   (OIPF)
Reviewer: Joel M. Halpern
Review Date: 27-December-2012
IETF LC End Date: 17-January-2013
IESG Telechat date: 24-January-2013

Summary: As far as this reviewer can tell, this document is ready for 
publication as an informational RFC.  It seems to be properly formed 
according to the rules of RFC 3406.

The justification of need seems very light.  I have no idea how this 
compares with the standards the IEtF has applied to such justifications 
in the past, and therefore can not make any judgment as to its 
appropriateness.

Major issues:

Minor issues:

Nits/editorial comments: