[manet] Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft-ietf-manet-rfc5444-usage-06: (with COMMENT)
Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> Wed, 05 July 2017 15:16 UTC
Return-Path: <warren@kumari.net>
X-Original-To: manet@ietf.org
Delivered-To: manet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AF4C12EB8E; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 08:16:52 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-manet-rfc5444-usage@ietf.org, aretana@cisco.com, Justin Dean <bebemaster@gmail.com>, manet-chairs@ietf.org, bebemaster@gmail.com, manet@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.55.2
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <149926781216.19195.982371594232223754.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 08:16:52 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/manet/zyBO022qzuvt6sOf0aVGDIaPxV4>
Subject: [manet] Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft-ietf-manet-rfc5444-usage-06: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks <manet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/manet>, <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/manet/>
List-Post: <mailto:manet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet>, <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 15:16:52 -0000
Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-manet-rfc5444-usage-06: 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-manet-rfc5444-usage/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I support Ben's non-DISCUSS. The RFC2119 language usage feels odd, I think that people will do the right thing. Issue: Section 1.3 (Status of this document) and Section 2 (Terminology) are on page 7 - this is about a 3rd of the way through the document -- the into and history are useful and interesting, but I feel it might be nice to re-order the sections so that the status and terminology are higher (esp. the Status bit). I've balloted No Objection, so feel free to ignore this :-) I have a minor nit, you might want to fix if if doing any other edits: Section 1.2.1 - Packet / Message Format O: "... a packet transmission following a successful packet reception is by design of a new packet that may include all, some, or none..." P: "... a packet transmission following a successful packet reception is by design a new packet that may include all, some, or none..." C: Removed the extra "of"
- [manet] Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft-iet… Warren Kumari
- Re: [manet] Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft… Dearlove, Christopher (UK)