Skip to main content

A Common Schema for Internet Registry Information Service Transfer Protocols
draft-ietf-crisp-iris-common-transport-05

Yes

(Ted Hardie)

No Objection

(Bill Fenner)
(Brian Carpenter)
(Dan Romascanu)
(David Kessens)
(Jari Arkko)
(Jon Peterson)
(Lars Eggert)
(Lisa Dusseault)
(Ross Callon)

Abstain


Note: This ballot was opened for revision 05 and is now closed.

Ted Hardie Former IESG member
Yes
Yes () Unknown

                            
Bill Fenner Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Brian Carpenter Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Dan Romascanu Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
David Kessens Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Jari Arkko Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Jon Peterson Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Lars Eggert Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Lisa Dusseault Former IESG member
(was Discuss) No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Magnus Westerlund Former IESG member
(was Discuss) No Objection
No Objection (2007-01-24) Unknown
Informative Reference list:

[8]   Newton, A. and M. Sanz, "Internet Registry Information
         Service", RFC 3891, January 2004.

RFC 3891 is: The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Replaces Header
Ross Callon Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Russ Housley Former IESG member
(was Discuss) No Objection
No Objection (2007-01-22) Unknown
  Section 4: s/optionalal/optional/

  Section 10 should all be one subsection.
Sam Hartman Former IESG member
Abstain
Abstain (2007-01-22) Unknown
I don't think this specification provides enough detail that it
guarantees interoperable implementations.  There is not sufficient
mandatory behavior.  I also disagree that this spec represents an
appropriate decomposition of the problem space.  It seems based on
textual reuse rather than some abstraction in the problem domain.