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

Warren Kumari Yes

Thank for an easy one!

(Alexey Melnikov) Yes

Nit:

1.  Introduction

   After those registrations were
   done, there were still some unused values that can be used for other
   security groups, there were still some unused values.

I think the last "there were still some unused values" should be deleted.

(Kathleen Moriarty) Yes

(Eric Rescorla) Yes

(Adam Roach) (was No Objection) Yes

I think it would be useful to include explicit entries in the initial IANA table indicating those values which are currently unassigned (i.e., add a range for 101-109 and 116-127.) For this use in particular, where overstepping the bounds of the allocation would impinge on codes retained by Symantec, this seems even more important than typical.

(Alia Atlas) No Objection

Deborah Brungard No Objection

(Ben Campbell) No Objection

Alissa Cooper No Objection

(Spencer Dawkins) No Objection

(Suresh Krishnan) No Objection

(Mirja Kühlewind) No Objection

I already appreciate that the Object Identifier Range was donated by Symantec, however, I wonder if "donated Symantec" needs to appear in the title...?

(Terry Manderson) No Objection

Alvaro Retana No Objection