Generic Routing Encapsulation (GRE) Key Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6
RFC 5845
Yes
(Jari Arkko)
No Objection
Lars Eggert
(Cullen Jennings)
(Dan Romascanu)
(Magnus Westerlund)
(Pasi Eronen)
(Ralph Droms)
(Ron Bonica)
(Ross Callon)
(Tim Polk)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 09 and is now closed.
Lars Eggert
No Objection
Jari Arkko Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
()
Unknown
Adrian Farrel Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2009-04-19)
Unknown
Although the references to 3775 and 5213 for terminology are clear, it would still be nice if some of the acronyms were expanded on first use.
Cullen Jennings Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Dan Romascanu Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Lisa Dusseault Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2009-04-22)
Unknown
The document could explain the need for having an encapsulation mode without keys. So far, it's not clear why two modes (and associated complexity) are needed if the mode with keys could handle all the encapsulation-only use cases.
Magnus Westerlund Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Pasi Eronen Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Ralph Droms Former IESG member
(was Discuss, No Objection)
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Robert Sparks Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2009-04-22)
Unknown
The 2nd bullet on page 10 last sentence could be misinterpreted such that this MAG NEVER sends that LMA a future message with a GRE Key Option. Consider clarifying the scope of the restriction?
Ron Bonica Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Ross Callon Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Russ Housley Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2009-04-21)
Unknown
Please consider the comments in the Gen-ART Review by Spencer Dawkins posted on 21 April 2009. All of the comments are minor, although I'd like to see a wording change to address this one: > > Is "vanilla" a clearly-understood term of art? :-)
Tim Polk Former IESG member
(was No Record, Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
(2009-04-23)
Unknown
Section 3.3.2, paragraphs 2 and 3... It is unclear why the MAG is permitted to either pick a new downlink key or use the same downlink key after handoff, but the LMA is required to use the same uplink key. Does the protocol fail if the LMA selects a new uplink key?