[Idr] Martin Duke's No Objection on draft-ietf-idr-capabilities-registry-change-08: (with COMMENT)

Martin Duke via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Thu, 30 April 2020 23:51 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Martin Duke via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-idr-capabilities-registry-change@ietf.org, idr-chairs@ietf.org, idr@ietf.org, Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>, aretana.ietf@gmail.com, jgs@juniper.net, shares@ndzh.com
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <158829067587.20254.11019177115301288258@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2020 16:51:16 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/WDfMijP5h79Ff477SUX_Q1CRz_M>
Subject: [Idr] Martin Duke's No Objection on draft-ietf-idr-capabilities-registry-change-08: (with COMMENT)

Martin Duke has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-idr-capabilities-registry-change-08: 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-capabilities-registry-change/



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

In section 3, it would be nice to have a sentence about the motivation for the new registry entries.

Should 255 be in table 1 as well as table 2?

[Idr] Martin Duke's No Objection on draft-ietf-id… Martin Duke via Datatracker