Skip to main content

Integrity Check Value and Timestamp TLV Definitions for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (MANETs)
RFC 6622

Yes

(Adrian Farrel)
(Jari Arkko)

No Objection

(Dan Romascanu)
(Gonzalo Camarillo)
(Ralph Droms)
(Robert Sparks)
(Ron Bonica)
(Russ Housley)
(Wesley Eddy)

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 08 and is now closed.

(Adrian Farrel; former steering group member) Yes

Yes ()

                            

(Jari Arkko; former steering group member) Yes

Yes (for -08)

                            

(Dan Romascanu; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -08)

                            

(Gonzalo Camarillo; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -08)

                            

(Peter Saint-Andre; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2012-02-28 for -08)
I concur with Stephen Farrell's thorough analysis.

(Ralph Droms; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -08)

                            

(Robert Sparks; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection

No Objection ()

                            

(Ron Bonica; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -08)

                            

(Russ Housley; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -08)

                            

(Stephen Farrell; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection

No Objection (2012-03-06)
I really think you're doing the wrong thing with two
registries (see below). However, it could work so
I'll leave it at that if I've not managed to 
convince you to change it.

I also think the change to key identifiers ought
be brought to the WG list for checking. I'm going to 
assume that the authors, WG chairs and AD will ensure 
that we're doing the right thing here and not breaking 
anyone's code on them without saying first on the WG 
mailing list.

There are a few occurrences of "signed" that might
be better worded after the Signature->ICV terminology
change.

(Stewart Bryant; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2012-02-28 for -08)
minor nit - TLVs is plural of "Type-Length-Value" not "Type-Length-Value structure" and expansion is NOT REQUIRED

It's a bit confusing putting a mini-IANA section in the Intro.

Section 13 after "This specification requests" a number of the terms defined are not used in the document.

(Wesley Eddy; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -08)