Subject: [I2nsf] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-i2nsf-problem-and-use-cases-16: (with COMMENT)

From: Ben Campbell <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 15:07:51 -0700

Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-i2nsf-problem-and-use-cases-16: 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-i2nsf-problem-and-use-cases/

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

I agree with the various abstains about this draft not appearing to have
archival value. I chose not to ballot "abstain" because I think it's best
to handle that issue at charter or adoption time rather than doing so
this close to the finish line. (I note that the WG charter explicitly
says that the WG may choose not to publish, so this is a borderline
case.) If there really are good reasons to expect archival value, it
would be helpful to include a paragraph early in the document describing
those reasons.

[Update: Thanks for addressing my other comment.]