[Lsr] Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-13: (with COMMENT)

Barry Leiba via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Wed, 06 May 2020 05:12 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
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 BE5DD3A0D61; Tue, 5 May 2020 22:12:41 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Barry Leiba via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc@ietf.org, lsr-chairs@ietf.org, lsr@ietf.org, Acee Lindem <acee@cisco.com>, aretana.ietf@gmail.com, acee@cisco.com
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.129.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Message-ID: <158874196172.28072.16634723092281391873@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 05 May 2020 22:12:41 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/wlxZYa73_QLIcdIo6AXyS6zhjj4>
Subject: [Lsr] Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-13: (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: Wed, 06 May 2020 05:12:42 -0000

Barry Leiba has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-13: 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:


— 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 —

   When an OSPF Area Border Router (ABR) distributes information between

Nit: the abbreviation “ABR” is not used elsewhere in the document, so there’s
no reason to include it.

— Section 3.1 —

   Prefix TLV includes a one octet Flags field.

Nit: hyphenate “one-octet” as a compound modifier.

— Section 4 —

   The ERLD is advertised in a Node MSD sub-TLV [RFC8476] using the
   ERLD-MSD type defined in [I-D.ietf-isis-mpls-elc].

Just checking: is the IS-IS draft the right reference here in this OSPF

There does seem to be so much common text between that document and this one
that I really don’t understand why these (the IS-IS and OSPF signaling) were
not put into one document, and this reference really drives that home.