[Json] Kathleen Moriarty's No Objection on draft-ietf-jsonbis-rfc7159bis-03: (with COMMENT)

Kathleen Moriarty <Kathleen.Moriarty.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 15 March 2017 17:22 UTC

Return-Path: <Kathleen.Moriarty.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: json@ietf.org
Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2C8A13172A; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 10:22:24 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Kathleen Moriarty <Kathleen.Moriarty.ietf@gmail.com>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-jsonbis-rfc7159bis@ietf.org, Matthew Miller <mamille2@cisco.com>, jsonbis-chairs@ietf.org, mamille2@cisco.com, json@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.47.1
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <148959854472.14161.773965414512574333.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 10:22:24 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/6B73jk16fi7SLMGEiB2ah-Ydnns>
Subject: [Json] Kathleen Moriarty's No Objection on draft-ietf-jsonbis-rfc7159bis-03: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" <json.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/json>, <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/json/>
List-Post: <mailto:json@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json>, <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 17:22:25 -0000

Kathleen Moriarty has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-jsonbis-rfc7159bis-03: 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:


I don't see a response to the first part of the SecDir review on the
Security Considerations section.  Given the content of the current
security considerations section, I agree with Ben that the additional
considerations he mentions should be included.  Can someone respond to
Ben please on that part of his review?  Thank you.