[Lsr] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc-12

Scott Bradner via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Mon, 04 May 2020 12:51 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 2B9A43A0861; Mon, 4 May 2020 05:51:41 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Scott Bradner via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: <ops-dir@ietf.org>
Cc: lsr@ietf.org, draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.129.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <158859670113.4129.7309190787687316520@ietfa.amsl.com>
Reply-To: Scott Bradner <sob@sobco.com>
Date: Mon, 04 May 2020 05:51:41 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/yZPAFiZf1Hg-356yV3lcvBnZmCI>
Subject: [Lsr] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc-12
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: Mon, 04 May 2020 12:51:41 -0000

Reviewer: Scott Bradner
Review result: Ready

This is an OPS-DIR review of Signaling Entropy Label Capability and Entropy
Readable Label Depth Using IS-IS

This ID proposes extensions to IS-IS to permit an egress LSR in a MPLS network
to signal ingress LSRs in the network that it can process the Entropy Labels
used in load balancing of traffic flows.

The extensions are simple and are clearly explained in the ID.  The ID itself
is short and simple and, as such, makes me wonder (rhetorically) why it took 12
versions of the ID to get to this point.

I see no operations-related issues with the proposal.