Subject: [manet] Kathleen Moriarty's No Objection on draft-ietf-manet-rfc6779bis-06: (with COMMENT)

From: "Kathleen Moriarty" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2016 12:14:00 -0700

Kathleen Moriarty has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-manet-rfc6779bis-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-rfc6779bis/

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

I'll wait for the response to Stephen's question as I also noticed the
boilerplate wasn't used (SecDir review did too, kinda).

I do appreciate the descriptions provided for the threats associated with
the read/write read/create objects.  Thanks for that.

---

From: Ulrich Herberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2016 22:25:44 -0700

Kathleen,

I wouldn't go as far as saying that "the boilerplate wasn't used";
there was only a minor difference to the boilerplate. I am not sure
where it came from. We copied that section from RFC6779, so my only
guess is that the boilerplate has changed since then (but I haven't
verified). Either way, I have prepared a new revision that uses the
same text as in the boilerplate.

Best regards
Ulrich

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 09:34:38 -0400

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jun 2, 2016, at 1:25 AM, Ulrich Herberg <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> Kathleen,
> 

Thanks for using the updated boilerplate.

Best regards,
Kathleen