A Data Model for Presence
RFC 4479

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 07 and is now closed.

(Allison Mankin; former steering group member) Yes

Yes (2005-12-01 for -)
No email
send info
Hooray, you got to the finish line.  Good work!

(Jon Peterson; former steering group member) Yes

Yes ( for -)
No email
send info

(Ted Hardie; former steering group member) Yes

Yes ( for -)
No email
send info

(Alex Zinin; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ( for -)
No email
send info

(Bert Wijnen; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ( for -)
No email
send info

(Bill Fenner; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ( for -)
No email
send info

(Brian Carpenter; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2005-12-14 for -)
No email
send info
Could note that it updates 3863 in the Abstract.

Gen-ART review by Elwyn Davies at
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/reviews/draft-ietf-simple-presence-data-model-06-davies.txt

(David Kessens; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ( for -)
No email
send info

(Margaret Cullen; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ( for -)
No email
send info

(Mark Townsley; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ( for -)
No email
send info

(Russ Housley; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection

No Objection ()
No email
send info

(Scott Hollenbeck; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection

No Objection ()
No email
send info

(Sam Hartman; former steering group member) Abstain

Abstain (2005-12-14 for -)
No email
send info
I believe publication of this document may be harmful to the Internet.
In particular I believe that this document modifies data structures
used outside the context of Simple in ways that are specific to
Simple.  The presence documents that this data model modifies are part
of CPIM and thus are used for interoperability between multiple
instant messaging systems.  While I this document takes steps to avoid
interoperability problems, There are several potentially harmful
interactions with CPIM.

1) This document doesn't give advice on how to generate presence
documents useful both to watchers who understand this data model and
to watchers who do not understand this model.


2) This document doesn't give advice sufficient to implement watchers
that can make reasonable use both of CPIM style presence documents and
that can make use of the data model documents.

3) I'm concerned that the interactions when multiple IM/communications
systems start using this model have not been fully considered.


I was not able to determine that these issues had been considered
adequately so I am abstaining.