Moving Outdated TCP Extensions and TCP-Related Documents to Historic or Informational Status
draft-ietf-tcpm-undeployed-03
Yes
(Alia Atlas)
(Jari Arkko)
(Martin Stiemerling)
No Objection
(Alvaro Retana)
(Barry Leiba)
(Brian Haberman)
(Deborah Brungard)
(Joel Jaeggli)
(Stephen Farrell)
(Terry Manderson)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 03 and is now closed.
Alia Atlas Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
()
Unknown
Jari Arkko Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
()
Unknown
Martin Stiemerling Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
()
Unknown
Spencer Dawkins Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
(2016-01-21)
Unknown
Thank you for producing this. Anything that helps new implementers understand what they can ignore in TCP is great! I have one nit you might want to consider. There are a couple of descriptions like o [RFC0675] U, "Specification of Internet Transmission Control Program" was replaced by the final TCP specification [RFC0793] that refer to "the final TCP specification". I know what you mean, but given that TCPM has producing an RFC 793 bis specification as a current milestone, RFC 793 may not be "final"!
Alissa Cooper Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2016-01-20)
Unknown
Regarding RFC 6013, wouldn't implementations of an experimental spec be expected to use experimental code points? It seems to me like the last two bullets of explanation would be sufficient without the first one.
Alvaro Retana Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Barry Leiba Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Ben Campbell Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2016-01-20)
Unknown
Does this really obsolete all the affected documents, in addition to the changing them to "historical"?
Benoît Claise Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2016-01-19)
Unknown
Thanks for this clean-up document. The first part of the sentence is obvious, right? For the content of the documents itself, the reader is referred either to the corresponding RFC or, for a brief description, to the TCP Roadmap document [RFC7414]. I guess you want to say something such as: The reader might find brief descriptions of those RFCs in the TCP Roadmap document [RFC7414]. If you keep your sentences: itself -> themselves Editorial OLD: o [RFC0889] U, "Internet Delay Experiments", which which describes experiments with the TCP retransmission timeout calculation NEW: o [RFC0889] U, "Internet Delay Experiments", which describes experiments with the TCP retransmission timeout calculation
Brian Haberman Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Deborah Brungard Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Joel Jaeggli Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Stephen Farrell Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Terry Manderson Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown