Re: [Lsr] Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc-12: (with COMMENT)

[Peter Psenak <[e-mail]>]

Hi Barry,

thanks for comments, I fixed them all.

thanks,
Peter


On 06/05/2020 06:58, Barry Leiba via Datatracker wrote:
> Barry Leiba has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc-12: 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-isis-mpls-elc/
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Just a few editorial nits:
> 
> — Section 1 —
> 
>     In cases where LSPs are used (e.g., SR-MPLS [RFC8660], it would be
> 
> Nit: you need a closing parenthesis instead of the second comma.
> 
>     This capability, referred to as Entropy Readable Label
>     Depth (ERLD) as defined in [RFC8662] may be used by ingress LSRs to
> 
> Nit: this needs a comma after the citation.
> 
> — Section 3 —
> 
>     originator.  Similarly in a multi-domain network, the identity of the
> 
> Nit: “Similarly” needs a comma after it.
> 
>     When a router propagates a prefix between ISIS levels ([RFC5302], it
> 
> Nit: remove the open parenthesis.
> 
>     an Autonomous System Boundary Router (ASBR) is outside of the scope
> 
> Nit: the abbreviation “ASBR” is not used elsewhere in the document, so there’s
> no reason to include it.
> 
> — Section 4 —
> 
>     A new MSD-type [RFC8491], called ERLD-MSD is defined to advertise the
> 
> Nit: 8491 capitalizes the “T” in “MSD-Type”.
> Nit: there needs to be a comma after “ERLD-MSD”.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>