A One-Way Packet Duplication Metric
RFC 5560

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 08 and is now closed.

(Jari Arkko) (was Discuss) Yes

(Lars Eggert) Yes

(Ron Bonica) No Objection

(Ross Callon) No Objection

(Lisa Dusseault) No Objection

(Pasi Eronen) No Objection

(Adrian Farrel) (was No Record, No Objection) No Objection

Comment (2009-04-03 for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
No email
send info
Since you will probably need to revise the document for Jari's Discuss,
here are some nits to fix along the way.

Abstract
s/from one host to the other/from one host to another/
s/has been defined/was been defined/

Section 1.2 - Same changes as Abstract

Agree with Jari that the definition of "information fields" needs to
be moved from 2.5 to above its first use (in section 2.4).

Section 2.4 bullet 2
s/Host are/Hosts are/

Section 2.5
s/Clocks do have to be/Clocks have to be/

Sections 4.1.2 and 4.2.2
Would it help to note Tf > Ts ?

Did you reach any conclusions with IANA for section 7?
If you are respinning the document, it would be good to capture these 
changes at the same time.

(Russ Housley) No Objection

(Cullen Jennings) No Objection

(Chris Newman) No Objection

(Jon Peterson) No Objection

(Tim Polk) No Objection

(Dan Romascanu) No Objection

(Robert Sparks) No Objection

(Mark Townsley) No Objection

(David Ward) No Objection

Magnus Westerlund No Objection