IETF conflict review for draft-irtf-icnrg-ccnxmessages

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 00 and is now closed.

Ballot question: "Is this the correct conflict review response?"

(Spencer Dawkins) Yes

(Suresh Krishnan) Yes

Alvaro Retana Yes

(Adam Roach) Yes

(Deborah Brungard) No Objection

(Ben Campbell) No Objection

Comment (2019-01-09)
A couple of editorial comments about the draft itself:

- It looks like some abbreviations would benefit from expansion on first mention (e.g. CCNx).

- Should we start encouraging individual submissions that use normative language to move to the RFC 8174 boilerplate?

(Alissa Cooper) No Objection

Benjamin Kaduk No Objection

(Mirja Kühlewind) No Objection

(Terry Manderson) No Objection

Martin Vigoureux No Objection