[mpls] MPLS-RT review of draft-esale-mpls-ldp-rmr-extensions-02

["Andrew G. Malis" <[e-mail]>]

I’ve been selected as an MPLS-RT reviewer
for draft-esale-mpls-ldp-rmr-extensions, which is currently a candidate for
MPLS WG adoption.

This draft documents the extensions required to LDP in order to signal
resilient MPLS ring LSPs, based on the architecture for RMRs described
in draft-ietf-mpls-rmr-02.

The MPLS WG has already accepted RMR work in general as a WG project, so
the primary question for draft-esale-mpls-ldp-rmr-extensions-02 isn’t
whether or not the draft should be accepted as a WG draft, but rather is it
ready for WG adoption?

In general, I found the described extensions to LDP, and their operation,
clearly written to the extent that they can easily be the basis for WG
input and review. The authors have taken the draft to the point where wider
WG review that would result from adoption is necessary.

Thus, my opinion is that the draft is ready for WG adoption at this time.

I have one nit that can be resolved either before or after adoption. In
section 4.2.2, the section begins:

   A node X wishing to participate in LDP RMR signaling SHOULD negotiate
   the RMR capability with all its neighbors.


I would think that should be a MUST rather than a SHOULD.

Cheers,
Andy