FYI.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Keyur Patel (keyupate) <keyupate@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 11:59 AM
Subject: Re: Routing directorate review of draft-ietf-manet-aodvv2
To: Jonathan Hardwick <Jonathan.Hardwick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Stan Ratliff <ratliffstan@xxxxxxxxx>, Justin Dean <bebemaster@xxxxxxxxx>
Its 95 pages. :)
Ok if I get back to mid june?
Regards,
Keyur
From: Jonathan Hardwick <Jonathan.Hardwick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Friday, June 5, 2015 at 8:49 AM
To: Keyur Patel <keyupate@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: 'Stan Ratliff' <ratliffstan@xxxxxxxxx>, 'Justin Dean' <
bebemaster@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: Routing directorate review of draft-ietf-manet-aodvv2
That is awesome. Thanks, Keyur!
I did not specify a deadline – because the original deadline set by the
MANET chairs of June 10 is now too close to be a reasonable request
(unfortunately, other potential reviewers of this document have been very
slow to respond). So, I won’t try to hold you to that timeframe, but when
(soonest) do you think you could do this review by?
Best regards
Jon
*From:* Keyur Patel (keyupate) [mailto:keyupate@xxxxxxxxx
<keyupate@xxxxxxxxx>]
*Sent:* 05 June 2015 16:29
*To:* Jonathan Hardwick
*Subject:* Re: Routing directorate review of draft-ietf-manet-aodvv2
Ack. Happy to do it.
Regards,
Keyur
*From: *Jonathan Hardwick <Jonathan.Hardwick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
*Date: *Friday, June 5, 2015 at 8:26 AM
*To: *Keyur Patel <keyupate@xxxxxxxxx>
*Cc: *'Stan Ratliff' <ratliffstan@xxxxxxxxx>, 'Jon Hudson' <
jon.hudson@xxxxxxxxx>, 'Justin Dean' <bebemaster@xxxxxxxxx>
*Subject: *Routing directorate review of draft-ietf-manet-aodvv2
Hi Keyur
Please would you do a routing directorate review of draft-ietf-manet-aodvv2?
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-manet-aodvv2
I realise that this document is probably not in your immediate area of
expertise. The WG chairs have requested help from the directorate to
· check the security implications in the draft (where there have
been some concerns expressed in the past)
· improve the clarity of the document (length, structure, language
and tone).
Please note that this is a “QA review.” The document does not yet have WG
consensus; the current goal is to improve the document quality in the above
areas. The following web page contains a briefing on the QA process, and
guidance for the QA reviewer.
https://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDirDocQa
Please let me know whether or not you are able to take this on.
Best regards
Jon
