Return-Path: X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C85A43A111C for ; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:17:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.096 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.096 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xYS9H1rQXlCN for ; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:17:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wr1-x434.google.com (mail-wr1-x434.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::434]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 744533A111B for ; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:17:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wr1-x434.google.com with SMTP id f13so214492wrm.13 for ; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:17:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=opJXvh+FBwFRnAUcleHeitEz9qlQfmsn7+Ue8q757L8=; b=h9fZkLI0ILQ0RxhJ7G+oDnqtOs4u6+GgkDSAf6gN8FTroiD2byxTa/2HGIluZWs/Mn VKKR8ooPeG+mvrNb0d93Gm2FQ3bM8zJ55tzTXVQc+iFkCZTeU6lemnItfvJMPWE+1icW h97TXJDlgsFh201X+VrY8UNC5tz+AlsXHuF8RpfSLpRgP2m0CVfaGTwjhiTs7jm3zxnN Ugsd3LjSTn+j0kGmhfu80xdPFvVZARNB/RqdxRNQNxWX40j3MCeMTeB1Y4yKWndKPfoA jMAYW15IK+VsY05niVVBMCOKianirT/uIIIxSkO9xRCeW0Ayp7M980GIsfW2bJDD3HoS Y/Vg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=opJXvh+FBwFRnAUcleHeitEz9qlQfmsn7+Ue8q757L8=; b=Xibm9QsKKB1VoYEoBImDkdykZf2A134KjTv5vgJozgd9boI1ftK7fTr8M6ssVTSVx7 5i/DGLkmiXSsi9KUFi1VOtAXmb+LzZM8JE+QX3DvReclmRbgwXB9UcRDGZW8Qpx9B/JV blWpxk0xHjStonh5XYFEseUELWHCOo9c18TgnhsW15C4uUaKFYP3gvaWmvl0NOZAe7zM cBy3seWH7X1S541xPnkegd9kc+/bYMjtXBFu+yBzTVUb8op7ajFnrZsAObMkrLoMPbjN wpH3dUC5NKDpKz+Jek1fu2rZXtqyiC2Y9SJGIy2hgZ9OEgBt8s5XnzV2Y/qcbg8M9uhp HEpw== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuaRFhuqDLau7UHX1Cb2pHCO7ofuW4/FZMscfZOcacTqAM+CGnVn pq+goGtv+oDTBfIF8yVnYKIXQh6wBSbekplYg0wxK1VD X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypJgNTYqahYFK3kt4kdayAwGayr8xspAkHntZ6N3bEBqrR37fYNVw8cp2pRopnfR6oIQMeMFDlUnk+w52Lk95/g= X-Received: by 2002:a5d:6b86:: with SMTP id n6mr160992wrx.113.1587071818401; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:16:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 1058052472880 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:16:57 -0700 From: Alvaro Retana In-Reply-To: References: <158707090832.17830.2874378176498907427@ietfa.amsl.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:16:57 -0700 Message-ID: To: IDR List , Christoph Loibl Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000f80d4d05a36ef396" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Idr] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-idr-rfc5575bis-21.txt X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2020 21:17:02 -0000 --000000000000f80d4d05a36ef396 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi! Just a counter-nit. In =C2=A77, the reference to rfc4360 (where the extended communities are defined) shouldn=E2=80=99t have changed to rfc7153 (a reorganization of the registries). Perhaps s/standardizes as BGP extended community values [RFC7153]/standardizes as BGP extended communities [RFC4360] Thanks! Alvaro. On April 16, 2020 at 5:11:44 PM, Christoph Loibl (c@tix.at) wrote: I just uploaded the -21(!) revision of the rfc5575bis draft to correct the nits pointed out by the latest reviews. --000000000000f80d4d05a36ef396 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =
Hi!

Just a counter-nit.

In =C2=A77, the reference to rfc4360 (where the extended commu= nities are defined) shouldn=E2=80=99t have changed to rfc7153 (a reorganiza= tion of the registries).

Perhaps s/standardizes as BGP extended community values [RFC7153]/sta= ndardizes as BGP extended communities [RFC4360]


Thanks!

Alvaro.

On April 16, 2020 at 5= :11:44 PM, Christoph Loibl (c@tix.at) wrote= :

I just uploaded the -21(!) revision of the rfc55= 75bis draft to correct the nits pointed out by the latest reviews.
--000000000000f80d4d05a36ef396--