Subject: [Gen-art] A *new* batch of IETF LC reviews - 2013-12-19

From: "A. Jean Mahoney" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 15:22:54 -0600

Hi all,

The following reviewers have assignments:

Reviewer          LC end       Draft
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Francis Dupont    2014-01-10   draft-moriarty-pkcs12v1-1-03

Joel Halpern      2013-12-27   draft-ietf-tls-applayerprotoneg-03

Kathleen Moriarty 2014-01-22   draft-housley-number-registries-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

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

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: Fri, 20 Dec 2013 10:43:22 -0500

Document: draft-ietf-tls-applayerprotoneg-03
     Transport Layer Security (TLS) Application Layer
              Protocol Negotiation Extension
Reviewer: Joel M. Halpern
Review Date: 20-December-2013
IETF LC End Date: 27-December-2013
IESG Telechat date: N/A

Summary: This document is ready for publication as a Proposed Standard.

Major issues: N/A

Minor issues:
     It appears that the ProtocolNameList is required to have at least 
two entries, based on "protocol_name_list<2..2^16-1>.  Why are at least 
two required, and how is the reconciled with the fact that when the the 
servers send a response using this construct it is required to include 
only 1 value?

Nits/editorial comments: