[Isis-wg] Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-isis-extended-sequence-no-tlv-05: (with COMMENT)

["Barry Leiba" <[e-mail]>]

Barry Leiba has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-isis-extended-sequence-no-tlv-05: 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 http://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:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-isis-extended-sequence-no-tlv/



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

With respect to keeping the ESSN increasing, you mention cold-starting
the router... but what about when the router hardware is replaced?  The
mechanism outlined in Section 10.1 should cover things there (just make
sure that the old and new routers both have the time set correctly), but
the mechanism in 10.2 won't.  Does this matter?  Or will the new router
always have new keys, so it doesn't matter (I guess the last sentence in
10.2 covers that)?

As long as you call Sections 10 and 11 "Appendix", the RFC Editor will
move them to the end and re-number them.  Please check in AUTH48 to be
sure the forward references to Section 10 (in Sections 3 and 3.1) are
correct.  Or perhaps just don't call those sections appendices.  It seems
to me that they're useful enough and brief enough to be part of the
document main.