[homenet] Martin Stiemerling's Abstain on draft-ietf-homenet-dncp-11: (with COMMENT)

"Martin Stiemerling" <mls.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 21 October 2015 21:26 UTC

Return-Path: <mls.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: homenet@ietf.org
Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73D2E1B3113; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 14:26:21 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: "Martin Stiemerling" <mls.ietf@gmail.com>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.6.1
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <20151021212621.1129.68875.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 14:26:21 -0700
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/NN8lYlbxIFQS5KLukKAxotyomL0>
Cc: homenet-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-homenet-dncp@ietf.org, homenet@ietf.org, mark@townsley.net
Subject: [homenet] Martin Stiemerling's Abstain on draft-ietf-homenet-dncp-11: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list <homenet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/homenet/>
List-Post: <mailto:homenet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 21:26:21 -0000

Martin Stiemerling has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-homenet-dncp-11: Abstain

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:


I am abstaining, as this draft is not specifying a full protocol but just
giving an abstract protocol (i.e., a hull only). I would ballot with
no-objection if the designated status of this draft would be
'Informational', but given that it is 'Proposed Standard' I do not see
that  RFC 2026, Section 3.1 and 3.2 are covered. It is neither a
Technical Specification nor an Applicability Statement.

However, I will not stand in the way of the publication of the document.