IANA Registration for Enumservices email, fax, mms, ems, and sms
RFC 4355

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

(Allison Mankin) Yes

(Harald Alvestrand) (was Discuss, No Objection) No Objection

Comment (2005-02-16)
No email
send info
Reviewed by Mary Barnes, Gen-ART

Version -04 satisfies my concerns about references for mailed *MS messages, and has also addressed the reviewer's significant commment.

(Steven Bellovin) No Objection

Comment (2004-08-31 for -)
No email
send info
Section 3: 
To reduce spam and
other unwanted communication other means should be made available.

"Other means" of what?

The security considersations for sections 3 and 4 are subsumed by 
section 6; there should just be pointers, as is done for section 5.

MUST cite RFC 3833 in the Security 
Considerations

(Margaret Cullen) No Objection

(Bill Fenner) No Objection

(Ted Hardie) (was Discuss) No Objection

(Scott Hollenbeck) No Objection

Comment (2004-08-30 for -)
No email
send info
There probably shouldn't be any references in the abstract.

(Russ Housley) No Objection

Comment (2004-08-31 for -)
No email
send info
  This document uses "e-mail" and "email."  Please pick one spelling.

  Please remove the references ([6]) from the Abstract.

  Section 2 says:
  >
  > The services specified here are intended NOT to specify the protocol
  > or even method of connection that MUST be used to achieve each
  > service.
  >
  I do not understand the use of RFC 2119 language here.  It is unclear to
  me what an implementation MUST or MUST NOT do.  What would appear in an
  implementation report regarding this sentence?

(David Kessens) No Objection

(Thomas Narten) No Objection

(Jon Peterson) (was Discuss, Abstain) No Objection

(Bert Wijnen) No Objection

(Alex Zinin) No Objection