Test Plan and Results Supporting Advancement of RFC 2679 on the Standards Track
RFC 6808

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

(Wesley Eddy; former steering group member) Yes

Yes ( for -02)
No email
send info

(Adrian Farrel; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection

No Objection (2012-09-06)
No email
send info
I am assuming that during this evaluation all metrics, metric 
parameters, and methodologies defined in RFC 2679 were found to have
been implemented and to be of use.

Looking forward to seeing the action to advance RFC 2679.

(Barry Leiba; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2012-08-29 for -02)
No email
send info
Adrian beat me to the click here: This says it's advancing 2679, but it's not, really.  It's an implementation report.  Are we going to have a 2679bis document to actually do the advancement?  Just a management item?  Discussion on the telechat to follow....

(Brian Haberman; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ( for -02)
No email
send info

(Pete Resnick; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2012-08-30 for -02)
No email
send info
I share the concerns of the others.

(Robert Sparks; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2012-08-29 for -02)
No email
send info
The last paragraph of the introduction points to 2026 instead of 6410. Should it be updated to reflect 6410 the way similar text in 5657 was updated?

Does the first observation in section 6.3.2 ("it was not possible to confirm the estimated serialization time increases in field tests") indicate a need to update what 5657 asks for?

Fun fact: If the text survives, this will be the first RFC to contain the word "overlord".

(Ron Bonica; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ( for -02)
No email
send info

(Russ Housley; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection

No Objection ()
No email
send info

(Sean Turner; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ( for -02)
No email
send info

(Stephen Farrell; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ( for -02)
No email
send info

(Stewart Bryant; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2012-08-30 for -02)
No email
send info
As Barry, and Adrian say this looks like an implementation report. If that is the case it would be useful to modify the title, Abstract and Introduction to reflect that.

NetProbe and Perfas+ need references.