Dynamic Host Configuration
charter-ietf-dhc-09

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 06-02 and is now closed.

Ballot question: "Is this charter ready for external review?"

(Ted Lemon) Yes

(Jari Arkko) No Objection

Comment (2013-08-29 for -06-02)
No email
send info
Please clean up the milestones before the charter is approved.

(Richard Barnes) No Objection

(Stewart Bryant) No Objection

Comment (2013-08-28 for -06-02)
No email
send info
I agree with Barry.

(Benoît Claise) No Objection

Comment (2013-09-12 for -06-05)
No email
send info
"Last call on this option will be done in the DHC working group."
We speak about WGLC, so this becomes
"WG last call on this option will be done in the DHC working group."
which we can rephrase, in more generic terms
"WG last call will be done in the WG where the document was created"
So, I'm wondering: why do you need to state the obvious?

And the famous "me too" regarding the update of milestones.

Spencer Dawkins No Objection

(Adrian Farrel) No Objection

Comment (2013-08-26 for -06-02)
No email
send info
I don't object to this revised charter.
It would be really nice if the WG chairs updated their milestones from time to time so that we can see the progress the WG is making and what the plans are.

(Stephen Farrell) No Objection

Comment (2013-09-12 for -06-05)
No email
send info
Impressively out-of-date milestones!

(Brian Haberman) (was Block, No Objection) No Objection

(Barry Leiba) No Objection

Comment (2013-08-26 for -06-02)
No email
send info
I echo Adrian's comments.  It would also have been nice if, for a late addition to the telechat agenda, and a useless diif, we might have had a brief note explaining the recharter so we'd have some background to look at the new charter from.

(Pete Resnick) (was Block) No Objection

(Martin Stiemerling) No Objection

(Sean Turner) No Objection

Comment (2013-08-27 for -06-02)
No email
send info
Fully supportive of #4 - ought to be able to knock that out by January.  It's not like it's not widely deployed ;)