Ballot Details: Resolve Issue #18: Introduce and document VIRTIO_NET_F_STANDBY feature (CLOSED)

Ballot Question Should the TC accept changes listed in the description to resolve issue 18, for inclusion in specification version(s) "virtio-v1.1-cs01", and future versions of the specification?
Ballot Description Please vote Yes if you agree with all of the following.
If you disagree, please vote No.
If you don't have an opinion, please vote Abstain.

I move that:
The TC agrees to resolve the following specification issue:
Issue #18: Introduce and document VIRTIO_NET_F_STANDBY feature
--------------------------------------
Document VIRTIO_NET_F_STANDBY feature that enables hypervisor to indicate virtio_net device to act as a standby for another device with the same MAC address.

https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/virtio-dev/201808/msg00021.html

--------------------------------------

The TC accepts the following proposed changes to the specification:
--------------------------------------
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/virtio-dev/201808/msg00021.html
--------------------------------------

The TC agrees to include the above change(s) in specification version(s) "virtio-v1.1-cs01", and future versions of the
specification.

--------------------------------------

Reminder: A Voting Member must be active in a TC to maintain voting rights. As
the Virtio TC has adopted a standing rule to conduct business only by
electronic ballot, without Meetings, a Voting Member who fails to cast a ballot
in two consecutive Work Product Ballots loses his or her voting rights at the
close of the second ballot missed.

--------------------------------------
Ballot Options
VOTING CLOSED: Monday, 3 September 2018 @ 8:30 am EDT
Yes 3 100
No 0 0
Abstain 1
Open Date Monday, 27 August 2018 @ 8:30 am EDT
Close Date Monday, 3 September 2018 @ 8:30 am EDT
Ballot Type Official, as defined by organization policies and procedures

Voting Statistics

Number of votes cast (excluding abstentions) 3
Eligible members who have voted 4 of 5 80%
Eligible members who have not voted 1 of 5 20%

Voting Summary by Option

Options with highest number of votes are bold
Option # Votes % of Total
Yes 3 100%
No 0 0%
Abstain 1

Voting Details

Voter Name Company Vote * Time (UTC) Comments
* Carabas, Mihai Oracle Yes 2018-08-27 14:35:00
* Huck, Cornelia Red Hat Yes 2018-08-27 12:43:00
* Pasic, Halil IBM Yes 2018-08-30 13:09:00 1
* Kiszka, Jan Siemens AG Abstain 2018-09-01 14:23:00 1
* Tsirkin, Michael S. Red Hat --

Voter Comments

Submitter Vote Comment
Pasic, Halil
IBM
Yes This is very vague, but from the discussion it seems the participants are comited to filling the gaps out later. Fine with me.
Kiszka, Jan
Siemens AG
Abstain Just reading these changes, it remains unclear what the impact of accepting this feature during negotiation is for the driver. So I would not consider this a "documentation" of the feature flag, rather a "reservation".

As I didn't follow the discussion in details and may miss the plan for next steps, I just abstain where I would otherwise reject.