Skip to main content

IETF conflict review for draft-schmitt-ipfix-tiny
conflict-review-schmitt-ipfix-tiny-01

Yes

(Mirja Kühlewind)

No Objection

(Adam Roach)
(Alexey Melnikov)
(Alia Atlas)
(Alvaro Retana)
(Ben Campbell)
(Deborah Brungard)
(Kathleen Moriarty)
(Suresh Krishnan)
(Terry Manderson)

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 00 and is now closed.

Ballot question: "Is this the correct conflict review response?"

Warren Kumari
No Objection
Comment (2017-09-11) Unknown
re: Spencer's comment -- I'd always thought that WGs concluded when they were done -- disbanded or closed both seem like they have more negative connotations (disbanded sounds like the WG lost interest, and closed sounds like it was forced on them -- but, this is simply pontificating on my part.
Benoît Claise Former IESG member
(was No Objection, Yes) Yes
Yes (2017-09-11 for -00) Unknown
Purely editorial:
- 
OLD: 
   Using UDP on the transport layer for transmitting IPFIX Messages is
   therefore RECOMMENDED. 

NEW: 
   Using UDP on the transport layer for transmitting TinyIPFIX Messages is
   therefore RECOMMENDED. 

- 
OLD:
TinyIPFIX messages can be included n other transport

NEW:
TinyIPFIX messages can be included in other transport

- 
OLD:
   In case pull request SHOULD also be supported by
   TinyIPFIX it is RECOMMENDED not to change the code of TinyIPFIX much
   to get along with the restricted memory available [schmitt2017].

NEW:
   In case pull request should also be supported by
   TinyIPFIX it is RECOMMENDED not to change the code of TinyIPFIX much
   to get along with the restricted memory available [schmitt2017].

Regards, Benoit
Mirja Kühlewind Former IESG member
Yes
Yes () Unknown

                            
Spencer Dawkins Former IESG member
Yes
Yes (2017-09-11 for -00) Unknown
Re:"IPFIX closed WG" ...

I wish I knew what the canonical term is - https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2418#section-4 offers "terminated" and "disbanded", but https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/ipfix/edit/state says "Concluded", and also offers "Dormant", which does appear in RFC2418. 

Perhaps it's better to to match the current datatracker description?
Adam Roach Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Alexey Melnikov Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Alia Atlas Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Alvaro Retana Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Ben Campbell Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Deborah Brungard Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Kathleen Moriarty Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Suresh Krishnan Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Terry Manderson Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown