[Idr] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-ext-15: (with COMMENT)

Adam Roach via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Thu, 13 June 2019 04:34 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: idr@ietf.org
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C04B120152; Wed, 12 Jun 2019 21:34:43 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Adam Roach via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-ext@ietf.org, Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>, aretana.ietf@gmail.com, idr-chairs@ietf.org, shares@ndzh.com, idr@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.97.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
Message-ID: <156040048349.27110.1051819060842698176.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2019 21:34:43 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/HwocLLd4S_d2pLEu96wmwT-yVcU>
Subject: [Idr] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-ext-15: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idr/>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2019 04:34:44 -0000

Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-ext-15: 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-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-ext/



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

Thanks for the work that everyone did on this document. I have only one
very minor comment.

§2.1.2:

>     Reserved: 1 octet that SHOULD be set to 0 and MUST be ignored on
>     receipt.

Making this a "SHOULD" rather than a "MUST" seems like it might interfere with
any future attempts to use this field, since compliant implementations might
have set the byte to arbitrary values.

This comment applies to other "reserved" fields in this document.