[Lsr] Martin Vigoureux's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions-20: (with COMMENT)
Martin Vigoureux <martin.vigoureux@nokia.com> Tue, 04 December 2018 09:49 UTC
Return-Path: <martin.vigoureux@nokia.com>
X-Original-To: lsr@ietf.org
Delivered-To: lsr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E27BF130E01; Tue, 4 Dec 2018 01:49:51 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Martin Vigoureux <martin.vigoureux@nokia.com>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org, Acee Lindem <acee@cisco.com>, aretana.ietf@gmail.com, lsr-chairs@ietf.org, acee@cisco.com, lsr@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.89.1
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <154391699192.4632.16900265463036458603.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2018 01:49:51 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/6SL6aQA8xZJerUQOwhTutcFB4_o>
Subject: [Lsr] Martin Vigoureux's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions-20: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: lsr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Link State Routing Working Group <lsr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lsr>, <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lsr/>
List-Post: <mailto:lsr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr>, <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2018 09:49:52 -0000
Martin Vigoureux has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions-20: 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-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hello, thank you for this document. I do have the usual IESG comment of suggesting to use RFC 8174 text for the requirement language, and also have a suggestion: In section 7.2 you say: When the P-flag is not set, the Adj-SID MAY be persistent. When the P-flag is set, the Adj-SID MUST be persistent. Because we're in the LAN Adjacency section you may want to qualify the Adj-SID as being a LAN one.
- [Lsr] Martin Vigoureux's No Objection on draft-ie… Martin Vigoureux
- Re: [Lsr] Martin Vigoureux's No Objection on draf… Peter Psenak