Network File System (NFS) Version 4 Minor Version 2 External Data Representation Standard (XDR) Description
draft-ietf-nfsv4-minorversion2-dot-x-41
Yes
(Martin Stiemerling)
No Objection
(Alia Atlas)
(Alissa Cooper)
(Alvaro Retana)
(Barry Leiba)
(Deborah Brungard)
(Jari Arkko)
(Joel Jaeggli)
(Stephen Farrell)
(Terry Manderson)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 39 and is now closed.
Martin Stiemerling Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
(for -39)
Unknown
Alia Atlas Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -40)
Unknown
Alissa Cooper Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -40)
Unknown
Alvaro Retana Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -40)
Unknown
Barry Leiba Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -40)
Unknown
Ben Campbell Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2016-01-14 for -40)
Unknown
To be honest, I can't offer much commentary on the 80 odd pages of XDR. I note that the sheperd's writeup says "“Verified XDR provided in documents is appropriate and aligns with XDR syntax and standards.” I'm not sure if that means manually verified or mechanically verified. (Hopefully the latter.) The IANA considerations delegate to [I-D.ietf-nfsv4-minorversion2]. But the IANA section there only contains a reference to RFC 7569. Maybe this draft could directly reference the RFC, or just say "No IANA considerations."?
Benoît Claise Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2016-01-20 for -40)
Unknown
My rate of number of pages reviewed per hour for this telechat just increased significantly. All those lines starting with /// are comments and should not be read, right :-) Kidding apart, I can only guess that the XDR is fine
Brian Haberman Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2016-01-20 for -40)
Unknown
I am in the same boat as Ben WRT reviewing XDR code. Given the description in the shepherd report, I trust the WG and AD have done the right thing.
Deborah Brungard Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -40)
Unknown
Jari Arkko Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -40)
Unknown
Joel Jaeggli Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -40)
Unknown
Spencer Dawkins Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2016-01-20 for -40)
Unknown
Thank you for making the relationship between 4.0, 4.1, and 4.2 very clear in this document!
Stephen Farrell Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -40)
Unknown
Terry Manderson Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -40)
Unknown