Re: [mpls] MPLS working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-ospfv3-codepoint

[Adrian Farrel <[e-mail]>]

All,

I think this is a fine idea to update RFC 8287.

I did a quick review which resulted in suggested changes to almost every
paragraph (see attached).

Two points of some note:
1. If you put Section 6 before Section 4 it will make it clearer why the use
of value 1 is not permitted in sub-TLV 35
2. Section 4 includes a "MAY" that is, I think, a MUST. If you intend to
keep it as "MAY" then you need to specify the normal processing.

Best,
Adrian

-----Original Message-----
From: mpls <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of Loa Andersson
Sent: 04 December 2020 04:55
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: [mpls] MPLS working group last call on
draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-ospfv3-codepoint


Working Group,

This is to initiate a two week working group last call on
  draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-ospfv3-codepoint-03.

Please send your comments to the mpls wg mailing list ([e-mail]).

There were no IPR disclosures against this document.

All the authors (no contributors on this document) have stated on the 
working group mailing list that they are not aware of any IPRs that 
relates to this document.

This working group last call ends Dec 18, 2020.


/Loa
for the MPLS wg chairs
-- 

Loa Andersson                        email: [e-mail]
Senior MPLS Expert                          [e-mail]
Bronze Dragon Consulting             phone: [phone]

_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls