Skip to main content

The Unicode Code Points and Internationalized Domain Names for Applications (IDNA) - Unicode 6.0
RFC 6452

Yes

(Pete Resnick)
(Peter Saint-Andre)

No Objection

(David Harrington)
(Gonzalo Camarillo)
(Jari Arkko)
(Ralph Droms)
(Robert Sparks)
(Russ Housley)
(Sean Turner)
(Stewart Bryant)

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 05 and is now closed.

Pete Resnick Former IESG member
Yes
Yes () Unknown

                            
Peter Saint-Andre Former IESG member
Yes
Yes () Unknown

                            
Adrian Farrel Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (2011-06-07) Unknown
Abstract

I don't know what it means to "specify consensus". Suggest...

OLD
   This document specifies IETF consensus
NEW
   This memo documents IETF consensus
END
David Harrington Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Gonzalo Camarillo Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Jari Arkko Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Ralph Droms Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Robert Sparks Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Ron Bonica Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (2011-06-08) Unknown
Unicode 6.0 is mentioned in the text body and included in the reference section, but there are no formal references to the document. (Run the nit-checker and you will see what I mean).
Russ Housley Former IESG member
(was Discuss) No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Sean Turner Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Stephen Farrell Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (2011-06-02) Unknown
s/This imply/This implies/
Stewart Bryant Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Wesley Eddy Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (2011-06-03) Unknown
typo in section 1: "that where allocated" -> "that were allocated"?