Bootstrapping Timed Efficient Stream Loss-Tolerant Authentication (TESLA)
RFC 4442
Yes
No Objection
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 03 and is now closed.
(Russ Housley; former steering group member) Yes
(Alex Zinin; former steering group member) No Objection
(Allison Mankin; former steering group member) No Objection
(Bert Wijnen; former steering group member) No Objection
(Bill Fenner; former steering group member) No Objection
(Brian Carpenter; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection
(David Kessens; former steering group member) No Objection
(Jon Peterson; former steering group member) No Objection
The expansion of the acronyms SIP and SDP, and inclusion of corresponding references for those protocols, might be appropriate.
(Margaret Cullen; former steering group member) No Objection
(Mark Townsley; former steering group member) No Objection
(Sam Hartman; former steering group member) No Objection
(Scott Hollenbeck; former steering group member) No Objection
The "IANA Considerations" section should explain which registry must be used to register the described parameters and values.
(Ted Hardie; former steering group member) No Objection
The document notes that NTP may be used as an out-of-band mechanism for synchronization, and it assigns this a SHOULD when piggybacking timestamp information is not appropriate (as when the media receiver is not the MIKEY initiator). Is there any general set of characteristics for out-of-band mechanisms which would allow someone to know whether a mechanism might substitute for NTP in a specific environment?