Subject: [Gen-art] Assignments for the 2014-04-10 Telechat

From: "A. Jean Mahoney" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2014 17:01:36 -0500

Hi all,

The following reviewers have assignments:

Reviewer            LC end       Draft
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alexey Melnikov     2014-03-24   draft-ietf-cdni-framework-10 **

Christer Holmberg   2014-04-01   draft-ietf-pcp-dhcp-11 *

Meral Shirazipour   2014-03-28 draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-11 *

Russ Housley        2013-12-16   draft-ietf-opsec-vpn-leakages-04 *

* Earlier draft reviewed
** Already reviewed

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

For your convenience, the review boilerplate template is included below.

Note that reviews should ideally be posted to the gen-art mailing list
by COB on Tuesday:
http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/

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

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

Summary:

Major issues:

Minor issues:

Nits/editorial comments:

---

From: Russ Housley <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 18:47:15 -0400

> Russ Housley        2013-12-16   draft-ietf-opsec-vpn-leakages-04 *

I have reviewed two previous versions of this document.  I have included this note on both...

> Personal Observation:
> 
> I do not find this document very helpful.  It can be summarized as:
> 
>    If IPv6 is not supported in your VPN software, then disable IPv6
>    support in all network interfaces before you try to use it.
> 
> I do not know why the OPSEC WG thinks that this message is worthy of
> an RFC.

I am not going to put any more time into this document.

Russ