Guidelines and Registration Procedures for Interface Types and Tunnel Types
draft-thaler-iftype-reg-07
Yes
(Alexey Melnikov)
(Suresh Krishnan)
No Objection
Roman Danyliw
Warren Kumari
Éric Vyncke
(Adam Roach)
(Alvaro Retana)
(Barry Leiba)
(Deborah Brungard)
(Magnus Westerlund)
(Martin Vigoureux)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 06 and is now closed.
Roman Danyliw
No Objection
Warren Kumari
No Objection
Éric Vyncke
No Objection
Alexey Melnikov Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
(for -06)
Not sent
Suresh Krishnan Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
(for -06)
Unknown
Adam Roach Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -06)
Not sent
Alissa Cooper Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2019-12-19 for -06)
Sent
Please respond to the Gen-ART review.
Alvaro Retana Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -06)
Not sent
Barry Leiba Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -06)
Not sent
Benjamin Kaduk Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2019-12-18 for -06)
Sent
Section 6.1
5. If instead the Designated Expert does not approve registration
(e.g., for any of the reasons in [RFC8126] section 3), a
registrant can resubmit a corrected request if desired, or the
IESG can override the Designated Expert and approve it per the
process in Section 5.3 of [RFC8126].
These section references look like they're for RFC 5226's sections and
should be updated for RFC 8126's different layout. (So, 5, and 3.3,
respectively, it seems, in an amusing numerological twist.)
Section 9.2
[I thought IANA did not guarantee stability of the anchor portion of
links, and preferred that we not include them in references. Maybe this
case is special?]
Deborah Brungard Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -06)
Not sent
Magnus Westerlund Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -06)
Not sent
Martin Vigoureux Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -06)
Not sent
Mirja Kühlewind Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2019-12-10 for -06)
Sent
First, a small note on the shepherd write-up: it should be "individual submission" and not "independent submission". And one quick question: Should section 4 use some normative SHOULDs? (While at the same time I have to say that I fine the use of MUSTs in section 6 rather unusual.)