Common Architecture Label IPv6 Security Option (CALIPSO)
draft-stjohns-sipso-11
Yes
(Tim Polk)
No Objection
(Magnus Westerlund)
(Pasi Eronen)
(Russ Housley)
Abstain
(Jari Arkko)
(Lars Eggert)
(Ron Bonica)
No Record
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 11 and is now closed.
Chris Newman Former IESG member
(was No Objection)
Yes
Yes
(2009-02-19)
Unknown
The additional comments in -07 have improved this document to the level where I feel comfortable voting yes on this proposal.
Tim Polk Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
()
Unknown
Magnus Westerlund Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Pasi Eronen Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Ross Callon Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2009-03-05)
Unknown
To me it appears that existing L3VPN technology, while widely deployed and therefore also widely implemented, is really not a great fit for the problem that this document is trying to solve. To a large extent L3VPNs rely on the service providers to correctly configure which sites go into which VPNs. This is great for L3VPNs (relieving private networks of significant effort), but seems wrong for what this document is doing. This is part of my motivation for entering a "no objection" vote.
Russ Housley Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Jari Arkko Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
Abstain
Abstain
()
Unknown
Lars Eggert Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
Abstain
Abstain
()
Unknown
Ron Bonica Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
Abstain
Abstain
()
Unknown
Dan Romascanu Former IESG member
No Record
No Record
(2009-01-29)
Unknown
I support the issues raised in the DISCUSSes of ROn and Lars.