Overview of Pre-Congestion Notification Encoding
RFC 6627

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

(David Harrington) Yes

(Ron Bonica) No Objection

(Stewart Bryant) (was Discuss) No Objection

(Gonzalo Camarillo) No Objection

(Wesley Eddy) No Objection

(Adrian Farrel) (was Discuss) No Objection

Comment (2012-03-19)
No email
send info
Thank you for addressing my Discuss issues and Comments.

Note that the revised text in Section 5 (for which, thanks) is
missing blank lines between the paragraphs.

(Stephen Farrell) No Objection

(Russ Housley) (was Discuss) No Objection

Comment (2012-03-01)
No email
send info
The Gen-ART Review by Pete McCann on 28-Feb-2012 included some
  editorial suggestions that deserve consideration

  (1) Section says:
  > ... full-functionality option in Section
  I think you meant "Section".  One other place in this
  paragraph needs this correction too.

  (2) Section 4.2 says:
  > The problem with 3-in-1 encoding is that the 10-codepoint does
  > not survive decapsulation with the tunneling options in
  > Section -
  Again, you meant -

(Peter Saint-Andre) No Objection

(Robert Sparks) No Objection