Skip to main content

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

Yes

(Allison Mankin)

No Objection

(Alex Zinin)
(Bert Wijnen)
(Bill Fenner)
(David Kessens)
(Jon Peterson)
(Margaret Cullen)
(Ted Hardie)
(Thomas Narten)

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

Allison Mankin Former IESG member
Yes
Yes () Unknown

                            
Alex Zinin Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Bert Wijnen Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Bill Fenner Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
David Kessens Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Harald Alvestrand Former IESG member
(was Discuss, No Objection) No Objection
No Objection (2005-02-16) Unknown
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.
Jon Peterson Former IESG member
(was Discuss, Abstain) No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Margaret Cullen Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Russ Housley Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (2004-08-31) Unknown
  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?
Scott Hollenbeck Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (2004-08-30) Unknown
There probably shouldn't be any references in the abstract.
Steven Bellovin Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (2004-08-31) Unknown
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
Ted Hardie Former IESG member
(was Discuss) No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Thomas Narten Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown