Considerations on the Application of the Level 3 Multihoming Shim Protocol for IPv6 (Shim6)
draft-garcia-shim6-applicability-05
Yes
(Jari Arkko)
No Objection
(Gonzalo Camarillo)
(Pete Resnick)
(Peter Saint-Andre)
(Robert Sparks)
(Ron Bonica)
(Russ Housley)
(Wesley Eddy)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 03 and is now closed.
Jari Arkko Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
()
Unknown
Adrian Farrel Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2012-03-15 for -03)
Unknown
The first two paragraphs of the Security section reads oddly. Suggest: OLD This section considers the applicability of the Shim6 protocol from a security perspective, i.e. which security features can expect applications and users of the Shim6 protocol. First of all, it should be noted that the Shim6 protocol is not a security protocol, like for instance HIP. NEW This section considers the applicability of the Shim6 protocol from a security perspective, i.e. which security features can be expected by applications and users of the Shim6 protocol. First of all, it should be noted that the Shim6 protocol is not a security protocol, unlike for instance HIP. END
Gonzalo Camarillo Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -03)
Unknown
Pete Resnick Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -03)
Unknown
Peter Saint-Andre Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -03)
Unknown
Robert Sparks Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -03)
Unknown
Ron Bonica Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -03)
Unknown
Russ Housley Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Sean Turner Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2012-03-14 for -03)
Unknown
I like the edits agreed as a result of Stephen's comments.
Stephen Farrell Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2012-03-09 for -03)
Unknown
- I wondered how IPsec was affected by or affects shim6. Figure 3 didn't really tell me. - Section 3.3 seems a bit odd - why do you want to control CGA parameters via DHCP? (That's also the subject of a discuss on ietf-csi-dhcpv6-cga-ps.) Its also not the case (is it?) that private key information is ever exchanged like this. Similarly with 3.4. Could both these sections not actually just be deleted?
Stewart Bryant Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2012-03-07 for -03)
Unknown
As a courtesy to the RFC Editor, the authors should scrub the document for terms not expanded on first use.
Wesley Eddy Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -03)
Unknown