IETF conflict review for draft-gont-dhcpv6-stable-privacy-addresses
conflict-review-gont-dhcpv6-stable-privacy-addresses-02
Yes
(Alvaro Retana)
No Objection
(Alia Atlas)
(Alissa Cooper)
(Deborah Brungard)
(Jari Arkko)
(Stephen Farrell)
(Terry Manderson)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 00 and is now closed.
Ballot question: "Is this the correct conflict review response?"
Alvaro Retana Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
(for -01)
Unknown
Suresh Krishnan Former IESG member
(was No Objection, Yes)
Yes
Yes
(2016-05-17 for -00)
Unknown
General: The document contains instances of normative language such as "A DHCPv6 server implementing this specification must select the IPv6 addresses to be leased with the following algorithm" Suggest rewording to something like "A DHCPv6 server implementing this specification selects the IPv6 addresses to be leased with the following algorithm" Section 5: Security considerations Suggest adding the privacy assessment RFC as a reference in addition to the anonymity profile RFC. OLD: Please read [I-D.ietf-dhc-anonymity-profile] for a comprehensive assessment of the privacy implications of DHCPv6. NEW: Please read [RFC7824] and [RFC7844] for a comprehensive assessment of the privacy implications of DHCPv6.
Alia Atlas Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -01)
Unknown
Alissa Cooper Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -01)
Unknown
Ben Campbell Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2016-05-18 for -01)
Unknown
I am interested in the results of Stephen's DISCUSS/
Deborah Brungard Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -00)
Unknown
Jari Arkko Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -01)
Unknown
Stephen Farrell Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
(for -01)
Unknown
Terry Manderson Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -01)
Unknown