Skip to main content

Protocol Independent Multicast - Dense Mode (PIM-DM): Protocol Specification (Revised)
draft-ietf-pim-dm-new-v2-05

Yes

(Alex Zinin)

No Objection

(Allison Mankin)
(Russ Housley)
(Ted Hardie)

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

Alex Zinin Former IESG member
Yes
Yes () Unknown

                            
Allison Mankin Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Bert Wijnen Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (2004-01-20) Unknown
From OPS Directorate (Pekka):

One question/comment:

6.  IANA Considerations
6.1.  PIM Address Family
6.2.  PIM Hello Options

==> this specification defines PIM AF/Hello options which affect all
the PIM protocols (including PIM-SM). Is this the appropriate place to
do so (at least, if it is, I guess it should be explicitly called out
in the section, and noted in the other PIM specs as well..)?  At
least, the PIM-SM revised spec includes about the same text again --
you can't do the allocations twice, at least.. :-)

nits:
 - split refs
 - add ipr etc. sections
Ned Freed Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (2004-01-18) Unknown
Nits: No copyright or IPR boilerplate, references need separating
Russ Housley Former IESG member
(was Discuss) No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Steven Bellovin Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (2004-01-20) Unknown
Since when is set union non-commutativ (section 2.2)?  If it is non-commutative here, it shouldn't be called set union, or the reason for the difference should be explained.

The IPsec section of the security considerations is quite vague; it doesn't really say what has to be supported.  It also doesn't take msec into account.
Ted Hardie Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown