[Lsr] Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft-ietf-lsr-isis-rfc7810bis-04: (with COMMENT)

[Warren Kumari <[e-mail]>]

Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-lsr-isis-rfc7810bis-04: 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-lsr-isis-rfc7810bis/



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

I do have a question and a suggestion:

1: From the shepherd writeup:
(7) Has each author confirmed that any and all appropriate IPR
disclosures required for full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78
and BCP 79 have already been filed. If not, explain why.

    Pending Response at WG adoption:
    Authors: S Giacolone, D Ward
    Contributors: A Atlas, C Filsfils

    There was no IPR poll done during/after WGLC.
---
I'm not sure I really understand what happened, and if they ever replied - I'll
trust that the AD did the right thing.

2: The abstract says: This document obsoletes RFC 7810.
Once this is published it won't be clear that this is a -bis. It might be
useful to include something like: This document obsoletes RFC 7810 (see the
Appendix for details). (if the RFC editor will allow it that is :-))

I also agree with Mirja's comments.