IETF conflict review for draft-irtf-panrg-path-properties
conflict-review-irtf-panrg-path-properties-00

The following approval message was sent
From: The IESG
To: Colin Perkins ,
    Internet Research Steering Group ,
    draft-irtf-panrg-path-properties@ietf.org,
    irtf-chair@irtf.org,
    mohamed.boucadair@orange.com,
    panrg-chairs@ietf.org
Cc: IETF-Announce ,
    The IESG ,
    iana@iana.org
Subject: Results of IETF-conflict review for draft-irtf-panrg-path-properties-08

The IESG has completed a review of draft-irtf-panrg-path-properties-08
consistent with RFC5742.

The IESG has no problem with the publication of 'A Vocabulary of Path
Properties'  as an Informational RFC.

The IESG has concluded that there is no conflict between this document and
IETF work.

The IESG would also like the IRTF to review the comments in the datatracker
related to this document and determine whether or not they merit
incorporation into the document. Comments may exist in both the ballot and
the history log.

The IESG review is documented at:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/conflict-review-irtf-panrg-path-properties/

A URL of the reviewed Internet-Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-panrg-path-properties/

The process for such documents is described in RFC 5743

Thank you,

The IESG Secretary

[Ballot comment]
No objection, but I wonder whether an extension of RFC 5742 would be more suitable: "The IESG has concluded that this work is related to IETF work done in several WGs, but this relationship does not prevent publishing."

The authors have some references to ALTO and TEAS among others.

[Ballot comment]
No objection, but I would have preferred an extension of RFC 5742 "The IESG has concluded that this work is related to IETF work done in several WGs, but this relationship does not prevent publishing."

The authors have some references to ALTO and TEAS among others.