RFC 3627 to Historic Status
RFC 6547
Yes
(Jari Arkko)
(Ron Bonica)
No Objection
(Adrian Farrel)
(Dan Romascanu)
(Gonzalo Camarillo)
(Peter Saint-Andre)
(Ralph Droms)
(Robert Sparks)
(Russ Housley)
(Sean Turner)
(Stephen Farrell)
(Stewart Bryant)
(Wesley Eddy)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 01 and is now closed.
Jari Arkko Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
()
Ron Bonica Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
()
Adrian Farrel Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Dan Romascanu Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Gonzalo Camarillo Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Pete Resnick Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2012-01-28)
Has there actually been confusion by people referring to and using 3627? This document says that it is moving 3627 to Historic to avoid such confusion, but never actually said that such confusions occurred. If they have occurred, it would be useful to say that. If they haven't occurred, I wonder why this document was necessary. (Note: Neither the shepherding writeup nor the IESG writeup were helpful in this regard as neither actually mentioned why the WG thought this was a useful document. It only had the standard one-liner saying, "there was consensus", which was not useful info.)
Peter Saint-Andre Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Ralph Droms Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Robert Sparks Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Russ Housley Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Sean Turner Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Stephen Farrell Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Stewart Bryant Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Wesley Eddy Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()