Re: [manet] I-D Action: draft-ietf-manet-dlep-latency-extension-02.txt

[Rick Taylor <[e-mail]>]

Hi Lou,

On Mon, 2018-02-19 at 17:07 -0500, Lou Berger wrote:
> 
> On 2/19/2018 6:44 AM, Rick Taylor wrote:
> > Hi Lou,
> > 
> > AB raises a good point about behaviour when one peer does not
> > support
> > the extension.
> 
> I think I missed his point on this.  But there is no issue here, per 
> standard 8179 processing, if one peer doesn't support the extension
> it 
> isn't used.  What else needs to be said?
> 
> > In the LID extension draft, I have tried to add normative text that
> > describes how an implementation supports core DLEP when it does
> > layer-3
> > routing.  I think a quick sentence describing how the core Latency
> > metric should be used when this extension is in use, and not in use
> > might be beneficial.
> 
> in this extension 8179 behavior continues even when the extension is 
> used, so I'm not sure what the concern is for this draft.

Okay, on re-reading, I'm happy with the text as is.

Cheers,

Rick