[lisp] Martin Duke's No Objection on draft-ietf-lisp-gpe-16: (with COMMENT)

Martin Duke via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Tue, 07 July 2020 04:18 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Martin Duke via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-lisp-gpe@ietf.org, lisp-chairs@ietf.org, lisp@ietf.org, Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net>, ggx@gigix.net
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <159409552544.13567.15726300538018829032@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2020 21:18:45 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/0DaQ9C4PRi7Dxp8D1j8TDCWku6I>
Subject: [lisp] Martin Duke's No Objection on draft-ietf-lisp-gpe-16: (with COMMENT)

Martin Duke has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-lisp-gpe-16: 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-lisp-gpe/



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

I found the requirements in Section 4.3.1 (IPv6 zero checksum) quite onerous
and can’t help but wonder if it’s worth the complexity, or just that people
already have it implemented in hardware.

This seems like a very useful extension for LISP.

s/octet/octet

s/payolads/payloads

[lisp] Martin Duke's No Objection on draft-ietf-l… Martin Duke via Datatracker
Re: [lisp] Martin Duke's No Objection on draft-ie… Fabio Maino (fmaino)