Dynamic Host Configuration
charter-ietf-dhc-09

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 06-05 and is now closed.

Ballot question: "Do we approve of this charter?"

(Ted Lemon) Yes

(Jari Arkko) No Objection

(Richard Barnes) No Objection

(Stewart Bryant) No Objection

Comment (2013-09-12 for -06-05)
No email
send info
...again it would be nice if the milestones were up to date.

(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?

Spencer Dawkins No Objection

(Adrian Farrel) No Objection

(Stephen Farrell) No Objection

(Brian Haberman) No Objection

Comment (2013-09-12 for -06-05)
No email
send info
I agree with Benoit that it is redundant to say that a WG item will be last called in the WG, but I am not going to block on that.

(Barry Leiba) No Objection

(Pete Resnick) No Objection

(Martin Stiemerling) No Objection

(Sean Turner) No Objection