GEOPRIV Layer 7 Location Configuration Protocol: Problem Statement and Requirements
RFC 5687
Yes
No Objection
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 10 and is now closed.
Lars Eggert No Objection
(Cullen Jennings; former steering group member) Yes
(Alexey Melnikov; former steering group member) No Objection
In Section 6:
The following requirements and assumptions have been identified:
Requirement L7-1: Identifier Choice
The L7 LCP MUST be able to carry different identifiers or MUST
define an identifier that is mandatory to implement.
Did you mean "identifier type" here?
Regarding
the latter aspect, such an identifier is only appropriate if it is
from the same realm as the one for which the location information
service maintains identifier to location mapping.
(Dan Romascanu; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection
There are plenty of acronyms not expanded at the first occurence: USB, DSL, PPoE, etc.
(Lisa Dusseault; former steering group member) No Objection
(Ralph Droms; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection
(Robert Sparks; former steering group member) No Objection
There are some typo/grammar issues with the Note blocks added to the start of Sections 4 and 5 that need to be corrected before publication.
(Ron Bonica; former steering group member) No Objection
(Ross Callon; former steering group member) No Objection