[6lo] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-6lo-minimal-fragment-12: (with COMMENT)

Mirja Kühlewind via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Tue, 18 February 2020 14:01 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: 6lo@ietf.org
Delivered-To: 6lo@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F4BE120821; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 06:01:40 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Mirja Kühlewind via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-6lo-minimal-fragment@ietf.org, Carles Gomez <carlesgo@entel.upc.edu>, 6lo-chairs@ietf.org, carlesgo@entel.upc.edu, 6lo@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.117.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Mirja Kühlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
Message-ID: <158203450004.14138.18211535077470130922.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2020 06:01:40 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/6lo/7ezl_1s4RVmuwWs5tBlY_pyujvw>
Subject: [6lo] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-6lo-minimal-fragment-12: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: 6lo@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: "Mailing list for the 6lo WG for Internet Area issues in IPv6 over constrained node networks." <6lo.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/6lo>, <mailto:6lo-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/6lo/>
List-Post: <mailto:6lo@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:6lo-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo>, <mailto:6lo-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2020 14:01:42 -0000

Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-6lo-minimal-fragment-12: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-6lo-minimal-fragment/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree with one of Ben's comments in that I'm not certain about the intended
document status as PS. I think Informational might be more appropriate, as it
rather describes an approach based on existing protocols than a normative
protocol specification.

Thanks for quickly addressing the TSV-ART comments (and thanks Jörg for the
TSV-ART review)!