Skip to main content

Operational Security Capabilities for IP Network Infrastructure
charter-ietf-opsec-05

Yes

(Joel Jaeggli)

No Objection

(Brian Haberman)
(Gonzalo Camarillo)
(Jari Arkko)
(Martin Stiemerling)
(Pete Resnick)
(Richard Barnes)
(Spencer Dawkins)
(Ted Lemon)

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 04-04 and is now closed.

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

(Joel Jaeggli; former steering group member) Yes

Yes (for -04-04)

                            

(Adrian Farrel; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2013-09-12 for -04-04)
I have no issues with the existing text.

However, if the ADs and chairs were to consider adding "privacy" to the scope, I would be very pleased to see it.

(Barry Leiba; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2013-09-04 for -04-04)
Thanks for handling my early review comments.

(Benoît Claise; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2013-09-12 for -04-04)
All my points have been covered by other ADs already.

(Brian Haberman; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -04-04)

                            

(Gonzalo Camarillo; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -04-04)

                            

(Jari Arkko; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -04-04)

                            

(Martin Stiemerling; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -04-04)

                            

(Pete Resnick; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -04-04)

                            

(Richard Barnes; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -04-04)

                            

(Sean Turner; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2013-09-05 for -04-04)
r/security.In particular,/security. In particular,

there's a couple of places where there are two spaces between words - might be datatracker injected.

I support Stewart's block, but I'd be happy with the following modification to the 1st sentence (r/must be through a/is by a working group):

New protocol work is addressed by a working group chartered for that work, or via one of the individual submission processes.

(Spencer Dawkins; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -04-04)

                            

(Stephen Farrell; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2013-09-12 for -04-04)
I agree with Adrian's comment. Adding privacy would here would be a good
thing if the WG are willing to take it into account. It'd be a bad thing if the WG
didn't care though.

(Stewart Bryant; former steering group member) (was Block) No Objection

No Objection (2013-10-14 for -04-05)
Thank you for addressing my concerns.

(Ted Lemon; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -04-04)