A One-Way Loss Metric for IP Performance Metrics (IPPM)
RFC 7680
Yes
No Objection
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 04 and is now closed.
Alvaro Retana No Objection
(Spencer Dawkins; former steering group member) Yes
(Alia Atlas; former steering group member) No Objection
(Alissa Cooper; former steering group member) No Objection
Same comment I had on the security considerations section in draft-ietf-ippm-2679-bis. I don't think it's quite accurate to say "there can be no release of existing user data."
(Barry Leiba; former steering group member) No Objection
Nice to see us moving documents to Internet Standard when it's appropriate.
(Ben Campbell; former steering group member) No Objection
Just reviewing the changes: 2.8.1: s/in future/future
(Brian Haberman; former steering group member) No Objection
No issues from my perspective given I only reviewed the changes (diff is a wonderful thing) between this draft and RFC 2680.
(Deborah Brungard; former steering group member) No Objection
(Jari Arkko; former steering group member) No Objection
(Kathleen Moriarty; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection
Thanks for adding in additional security considerations on reconnaissance.
(Martin Stiemerling; former steering group member) No Objection
(Stephen Farrell; former steering group member) No Objection
(Terry Manderson; former steering group member) No Objection