Ballot for charter-ietf-green
Yes
No Objection
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 00-05 and is now closed.
Ballot question: "Do we approve of this charter?"
Thanks for addressing my previous comments even if `For other related WGs, I suggest adding TVR and INTAREA (as there is an I-D about ICMP sending some consumption data).` is probably still an open issue.
This basically looks fine, although I have several nits about mixed-up uses of “efficient” versus “efficiency” and Random Capitalization of Stuff. “Defining use cases for managing Energy Efficiency Networks.” Should be “energy efficient networks”, right? And should be in lower-case, too. “Defining terms and definitions related to energy efficient metrics.” And this should be “energy efficiency metrics”. “Standard Track definitions of YANG data models at the component level, device level, and network level for energy efficiency network management” I *think* this one should be “efficient” but it kind of depends on what you’re trying to say. Please evaluate it, anyway. “managing Energy Efficient Networks” Lower case “energy efficient networks”.
"... consider updated operator input and requirements over that previously ..." s/that/those/
Thanks for revising the text based on my earlier feedback. ** Per "The GREEN Working Group will also liaise with other SDOs on benchmarking methodologies for collaboration and consultation", what does the "for collaboration or consultation" mean?