Sieve Email Filtering: Relational Extension
RFC 5231
Yes
No Objection
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 04 and is now closed.
(Scott Hollenbeck; former steering group member) Yes
(Alex Zinin; former steering group member) No Objection
(Allison Mankin; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection
This was approved so I'm sending this comment as a suggestion to Scott and Alexey as something they could advise the RFC Editor for doing while the document is on the queue: It would be best not to send drafts to the RFC Editor blocked for long times by normative references. This has a number of references to 3028bis, which appears to have a long time before it will be ready for publication. Those references seem to be generic enough to switch them to RFC 3028, with a parenthesis "(at the time of this publication a revision of RFC 3028 is in preparation)" which would free the document. Note about 3028bis: it's currently blocking 2 other docs in the RFC Ed queue, which maybe could have the same strategy applied. Bill has some data on the drafts blocking other drafts at http://rtg.ietf.org/~fenner/iesg/rfcq-random-checks.html The other incomplete normative is draft-newman-i18n-comparator, but I see it has now gone to Last Call, and though it's got a lot of work ahead, with a complex IANA registry etc, it seems close enough.
(Bert Wijnen; former steering group member) No Objection
(Bill Fenner; former steering group member) No Objection
(Brian Carpenter; former steering group member) No Objection
(Jon Peterson; former steering group member) No Objection
(Margaret Cullen; former steering group member) No Objection
(Mark Townsley; former steering group member) No Objection
(Russ Housley; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection
(Sam Hartman; former steering group member) No Objection
(Ted Hardie; former steering group member) No Objection