SACK-IMMEDIATELY Extension for the Stream Control Transmission Protocol
RFC 7053
Yes
(Martin Stiemerling)
(Spencer Dawkins)
No Objection
(Barry Leiba)
(Benoît Claise)
(Brian Haberman)
(Gonzalo Camarillo)
(Jari Arkko)
(Joel Jaeggli)
(Sean Turner)
(Stephen Farrell)
(Stewart Bryant)
(Ted Lemon)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 04 and is now closed.
Martin Stiemerling Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
()
Unknown
Spencer Dawkins Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
()
Unknown
Adrian Farrel Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2013-09-11)
Unknown
I have no objection to the publication of this document. Curiously, after reading it I cam to enter this position and found two other ADs had already made the point I wanted to make. Clearly, if the receiver is a legacy implementation, it will ignore the I bit, and perhaps this is the point. Since this document updates 4960, the behaviour on receipt of the I bit becomes normative, so making the behaviour somewhat optional (via SHOULD) seems a good way to get off the hook. However, the wording in section 5.2 does leave this all a bit ambiguous.
Barry Leiba Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Benoît Claise Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Brian Haberman 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
Joel Jaeggli Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Pete Resnick Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2013-09-10)
Unknown
Section 5.2 invites the question: Why shouldn't the receiver delay and, more importantly, under what circumstances is it reasonable for the receiver to delay and when is it not reasonable? Might be handy to give some advice here.
Richard Barnes Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2013-09-11)
Unknown
I had the same reaction to Pete. Under what circumstances would the receiver choose to delay (i.e., not obey the SHOULD)? If none exist, then it should be a MUST.
Sean Turner Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Stephen Farrell Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Stewart Bryant Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Ted Lemon Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown