Skip to main content

A Discard Prefix for IPv6
RFC 6666

Yes

(Jari Arkko)
(Ron Bonica)

No Objection

(Dan Romascanu)
(Gonzalo Camarillo)
(Pete Resnick)
(Peter Saint-Andre)
(Robert Sparks)
(Russ Housley)
(Sean Turner)

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 02 and is now closed.

(Jari Arkko; former steering group member) Yes

Yes ()

                            

(Ron Bonica; former steering group member) Yes

Yes ()

                            

(Adrian Farrel; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2012-02-01)
A bit like Stephen's Comment...

Section 3 contains to "SHOULD NOT" directives. This is an implication
that these directives can be varied. Do you want to describe how and
why, or do you want to change to "MUST NOT"?

Obviously, these "SHOULD NOTs" also impact the security discussion.

(Dan Romascanu; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -02)

                            

(Gonzalo Camarillo; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()

                            

(Pete Resnick; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection

No Objection (2012-06-08)

                            

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

No Objection ()

                            

(Ralph Droms; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection

No Objection (2012-05-22 for -04)
Thanks for addressing my issue with the Security Considerations section.

(Robert Sparks; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()

                            

(Russ Housley; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()

                            

(Sean Turner; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -02)

                            

(Stephen Farrell; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2012-01-29)
Hi Nick,

I don't get why the 3rd party AS stuff is SHOULD NOT and not 
MUST NOT. 

I think it'd be better to s/should not/ought not/ in section 5 to
avoid possible 2119 confusion.

S

(Stewart Bryant; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection

No Objection (2012-06-09 for -04)
I agree with Pete's DISCUSS on this document.

(Wesley Eddy; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2012-01-30)
I think "militating" should be "mitigating" in the abstract.