A Reliable Transport Mechanism for PIM

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 08 and is now closed.

( Adrian Farrel ) Yes

Jari Arkko No Objection

( Ron Bonica ) No Objection

( Stewart Bryant ) No Objection

( Gonzalo Camarillo ) No Objection

( Ralph Droms ) No Objection

( Wesley Eddy ) No Objection

Stephen Farrell No Objection

Comment (2011-11-01)
- Presumably if this experiment is a success then some method of
doing automated key management would be required for a successor
standards track document. I think just noting that in the
security considerations section would be good.

- I wondered why TLS wasn't considered as an additional option.
Be good to explain why, esp if there's a reason it wouldn't work
well enough.

( David Harrington ) No Objection

( Russ Housley ) (was Discuss) No Objection

( Pete Resnick ) No Objection

( Dan Romascanu ) No Objection

( Robert Sparks ) No Objection

( spt ) No Objection

Comment (2011-11-02)
s3.1 and s3.2: Not being a PIM expert, I tripped up over how IPv6 addresses could fit in to TCP Connection ID and SCTP Connection ID.  I kind of had to guess where I'd find more information about this, so a pointer to the xoring mechanism in RFC 4061 would have helped a lot.