NAT Traversal Practices for Client-Server SIP
draft-ietf-sipping-nat-scenarios-15
Yes
(Robert Sparks)
No Objection
(Adrian Farrel)
(Dan Romascanu)
(Ron Bonica)
(Russ Housley)
(Stewart Bryant)
(Wesley Eddy)
Recuse
(Gonzalo Camarillo)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 15 and is now closed.
Robert Sparks Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
()
Unknown
Adrian Farrel Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Dan Romascanu Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Pete Resnick Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2011-04-27)
Unknown
I agree with Stephen's Discuss point.
Ron Bonica Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Russ Housley Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Sean Turner Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2011-04-28)
Unknown
I agree with Stephen's discuss.
Stephen Farrell Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
(2011-04-27)
Unknown
The use of 2119 language here is a tiny bit odd. RECOMMENDED is used a bunch of times, but the doc's informational. I assume that those RECOMMENDED's just replicate what's already in standards-track or BCP documents? Might be worth pointing that out if its true.
Stewart Bryant Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Wesley Eddy Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Gonzalo Camarillo Former IESG member
Recuse
Recuse
()
Unknown