Subject: [mpls] draft-ietf-mpls-mna-hdr-18 telechat Tsvart review
From: Brian Trammell via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2026 23:09:40 -0800
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>

Document: draft-ietf-mpls-mna-hdr
Title: MPLS Network Action (MNA) Sub-Stack Specification including In-Stack Network Actions and Data
Reviewer: Brian Trammell
Review result: Ready with Issues

This document has been reviewed as part of the transport area review team's
ongoing effort to review key IETF documents. These comments were written
primarily for the transport area directors, but are copied to the document's
authors and WG to allow them to address any issues raised and also to the IETF
discussion list for information.

When done at the time of IETF Last Call, the authors should consider this
review as part of the last-call comments they receive. Please always CC
[email-masked] if you reply to or forward this review.

Thank you for the revised version of this document; the edits seem mostly
editorial but appear to point at clarifying my first concern. I'll defer
to the routing reviewers as to whether MNA/ECMP interactions remain an
issue.

I'm a little perplexed that the secdir review marked a doc ready where the
security concept is "we trust the IETF to only define secure usages of this
extension"; however, if the Security ADs are OK with this then I guess I am
too.