Subject: [babel] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-babel-v4viav6-07: (with COMMENT)

From: Roman Danyliw via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2022 14:46:54 -0800

Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-babel-v4viav6-07: 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/blog/handling-iesg-ballot-positions/
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-babel-v4viav6/

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

Thank to you Tero Kivinen for the SECDIR review.

I support Warren Kumari’s DISCUSS.

This helpful explanation
(https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/iesg/aaPn5j9JZxOCautwWwOqRMmPXHc/) of
history notwithstanding, given that this document invalidates a common security
assumption about isolated networks and is touching core internet technology,
getting field experience and publishing with experimental status seems more
appropriate than a proposed standard.

---

From: Juliusz Chroboczek <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2022 10:36:31 +0100

Hello Roman,

> history notwithstanding,

It seems that I'm not allowed to access this link.  Could I please have
a copy, or at least a summary?

-- Juliusz

---

From: Roman Danyliw <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2022 13:32:52 +0000

Hi Juliusz!

> -----Original Message-----
> From: iesg <[email-masked]> On Behalf Of Juliusz Chroboczek
> Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2022 4:37 AM
> To: Roman Danyliw <[email-masked]>
> Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked];
> [email-masked]; The IESG <[email-masked]>; [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-babel-v4viav6-07:
> (with COMMENT)
> 
> Hello Roman,
> 
> > This helpful explanation
> >
> (https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/iesg/aaPn5j9JZxOCautwWwOqRMmPXH
> > c/) of history notwithstanding,
> 
> It seems that I'm not allowed to access this link.  Could I please have a copy, or
> at least a summary?

Sorry about the unreadable link.  I was following the conversation via the DT's "Search Mailarchive" button from the document's "IESG evaluation record" tab.  It provides -- https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?q=subject:draft-ietf-babel-v4viav6+AND+subject:(discuss+OR+comment+OR+review).  In my view it must have given me the version of the message sent iesg@ietf as opposed to the identical message on babel@ietf.

I was referencing your explanation of the history of the document's status:

https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/babel/mH6Ys5uC_vW1_wJ7F3FpWoOiDJA/

Roman