[mile] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-mile-jsoniodef-10: (with COMMENT)

Adam Roach via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Thu, 05 September 2019 00:40 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: mile@ietf.org
Delivered-To: mile@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A986120830; Wed, 4 Sep 2019 17:40:01 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Adam Roach via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-mile-jsoniodef@ietf.org, Nancy Cam-Winget <ncamwing@cisco.com>, mile-chairs@ietf.org, ncamwing@cisco.com, mile@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.100.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
Message-ID: <156764400102.22766.2419644463294804047.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2019 17:40:01 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mile/2HV6bO5etPZb7fphCaeF2mNlIGE>
Subject: [mile] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-mile-jsoniodef-10: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: mile@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: "Managed Incident Lightweight Exchange, IODEF extensions and RID exchanges" <mile.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mile>, <mailto:mile-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mile/>
List-Post: <mailto:mile@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mile-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mile>, <mailto:mile-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2019 00:40:01 -0000

Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-mile-jsoniodef-10: 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:


Thanks for the work people put into this document. I have very little to add to
what has already been commented on by other IESG members, although id-nits did
turn up some issues regarding the version of JSON being cited, and the apparent
omission of a citation to RFC 8259 in the Normative Dependency section:

  == Missing Reference: 'RFC8259' is mentioned on line 157, but not defined

  == Missing Reference: 'RFC7159' is mentioned on line 202, but not defined

  ** Obsolete undefined reference: RFC 7159 (Obsoleted by RFC 8259)