Subject: [tsvwg] Martin Vigoureux's No Objection on draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-dscp-registry-06: (with COMMENT)

From: Martin Vigoureux <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 15:52:40 -0700

Martin Vigoureux has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-dscp-registry-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-tsvwg-iana-dscp-registry/

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

Hello,

Alissa's question also came to my mind, so I support her COMMENT.

Twice in the document you give a definition to "Standards Action", but it is
not strictly identical to the one of 8126. Citing RFC 8126 should be sufficient.

---

From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 11:07:04 -0500

Hi, Gorry,

> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-dscp-registry/

Have you had a chance to look at this one?

Spencer