Subject: [core] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-core-senml-more-units-04: (with COMMENT)

From: Mirja Kühlewind via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2020 04:03:51 -0800

Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-core-senml-more-units-04: 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-core-senml-more-units/

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

The shepherd write-up says: "The document is intended for Standards Track and
updates RFC8428." However, this document doesn't seem to update RFC8422. I
assume this is correct and the write-up is a bit outdated? Just wanted to
double-check...

---

From: Carsten Bormann <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2020 14:44:39 +0100

Hi Mirja,

The proposed resolution of the most recent discussion was indeed that we don’t update RFC 8422 here, but leave that to version number/must-understand field specifications.

Grüße, Carsten

---

From: Mirja Kuehlewind <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2020 14:45:39 +0100

Hi Carsten,

That’s fine. Thanks for confirming!

Mirja

> On 18. Feb 2020, at 14:44, Carsten Bormann <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Mirja,
>

---

From: "Alexey Melnikov" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2020 15:21:20 +0000

Hi all,

> That’s fine. Thanks for confirming!

I removed "update RFC8422" from the IESG ballot, but I haven't updated the write-up.

Jaime, can you please update the write-up to match the latest draft version?

Best Regards,
Alexey