Access Network Identifier (ANI) Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6
draft-ietf-netext-access-network-option-13
Yes
(Brian Haberman)
No Objection
(Benoît Claise)
(Gonzalo Camarillo)
(Martin Stiemerling)
(Pete Resnick)
(Ron Bonica)
(Russ Housley)
(Stephen Farrell)
(Stewart Bryant)
(Wesley Eddy)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 10 and is now closed.
Brian Haberman Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
(for -10)
Unknown
Adrian Farrel Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2012-05-23 for -10)
Unknown
This is a not-quite-Discuss Comment I think a number of references listed as Informative need to be moved to Normative. Specifically: SMI RFC 3629 RFC 1035 RFC 6275 I am in two mindsabout RFC2460. Happy to discuss why/whether this would be appropriate, but it looks like the uses are explicit "do encode this thing you need to read this reference" type of statements.
Barry Leiba Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2012-05-16 for -10)
Unknown
IANA Considerations rant:
o Action-1: This specification defines a new Mobility Header option,
the Access Network Identifier. This mobility option is described
in Section 3. The Type value for this option needs to be assigned
from the same numbering space as allocated for the other mobility
options, as defined in [RFC6275].
I noticed the same problem that confused IANA, and was going to kick in a DISCUSS to get it fixed: the registry is called "Mobility Options", and referring to it as a "Mobility Header option" confused it with the "Mobility Header Types" registry. No need for the DISCUSS, though, because the author noticed the error in Pearl's proposed IANA actions, and sorted it out by email.
So this comment will just serve to beat people up about this, and to rant a bit. You can otherwise ignore it:
Folks, it's just not that hard to go to http://www.iana.org/protocols/ and actually *look up* the correct name of the registry you aim to use... and then to use the *exact* name. Please be specific and accurate; it's important.
Benoît Claise Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
(2012-07-23 for -12)
Unknown
Gonzalo Camarillo Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -10)
Unknown
Martin Stiemerling Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -10)
Unknown
Pete Resnick Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
(for -12)
Unknown
Ralph Droms Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
(2012-07-19 for -11)
Unknown
I've cleared.
Robert Sparks Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
(2012-08-09)
Unknown
I assume the conclusion of the discussion you were having at IETF about the encoding of SSIDs fell out to UTF-8 instead of raw bits?
Ron Bonica Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -10)
Unknown
Russ Housley Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -10)
Unknown
Sean Turner Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2012-05-24 for -10)
Unknown
I'm piling on with Stephen and Robert.
Stephen Farrell Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Stewart Bryant Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -10)
Unknown
Wesley Eddy Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -10)
Unknown