Subject: [Gen-art] A *new* batch of IETF LC reviews - 2013-02-14

From: "A. Jean Mahoney" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 17:34:08 -0600

Hi all,

The following reviewers have assignments:

Reviewer          LC end       Draft
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Campbell       2013-02-28   draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-client-link-layer-addr-opt-04 *
  
Elwyn Davies       2013-02-22   draft-ietf-idr-as-private-reservation-03

Francis Dupont     2013-02-25   draft-ietf-dhc-secure-dhcpv6-07 **

Joel Halpern       2013-02-26   draft-ietf-tcpm-proportional-rate-reduction-04 **

Kathleen Moriarty  2013-02-27   draft-ietf-geopriv-flow-identity-01

Martin Thomson     2013-02-27   draft-ietf-mpls-gach-adv-06

* Last Call extended due to IPR disclosure 1710
** On the 2/28 telechat

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, 14 Feb 2013 19:26:14 -0500

Document: draft-ietf-tcpm-proportional-rate-reduction-04.txt
     Proportional Rate Reduction for TCP
Reviewer: Joel M. Halpern
Review Date: 14-Feb-2013
IETF LC End Date: 26-Feb-2013
IESG Telechat date: 28-Feb-2013

Summary: This document is ready for publication as an Experimental RFC

Major issues:

Minor issues:

Nits/editorial comments:
     Much of the information in the Abstract could be left out.  It 
suffices for it to be present in the Introduction, as it is.