Return-Path: <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix)
 with ESMTP id 41F3821F84D8 for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>;
 Sat, 16 Jun 2012 12:10:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.273
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No,
 score=-102.273 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.008, BAYES_00=-2.599,
 IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com
 [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id v1fhIWL4gBbk for
 <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 16 Jun 2012 12:10:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from morbo.mail.tigertech.net (morbo.mail.tigertech.net
 [67.131.251.54]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6CA021F84A2 for
 <mpls@ietf.org>; Sat, 16 Jun 2012 12:10:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailb2.tigertech.net (mailb2.tigertech.net [208.80.4.154]) by
 morbo.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C316FA63E3 for <mpls@ietf.org>;
 Sat, 16 Jun 2012 12:10:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailb2.tigertech.net
 (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6FE31C085A for <mpls@ietf.org>;
 Sat, 16 Jun 2012 12:10:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at b2.tigertech.net
Received: from [10.10.10.105] (pool-71-161-51-75.clppva.btas.verizon.net
 [71.161.51.75]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with
 ESMTPSA id 5DDD51C078F for <mpls@ietf.org>;
 Sat, 16 Jun 2012 12:10:11 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4FDCDA0D.6010204@joelhalpern.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2012 15:10:05 -0400
From: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
 rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [mpls] Comment on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-ethernet-addressing
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mpls>,
 <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mpls>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>,
 <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2012 19:10:13 -0000

In reviewing this document (sorry I am a day late for the WG LC end), a 
question occurred to me regarding the material in section 2.

Is there reason to believe that existing implementations will process 
received frames on pt-to-pt Ethernet links where the destination address 
is 01-00-5E-90-00-00?  If so, should that reason be mentioned (or am I 
just missing the obvious here?)  If not, is this a safe recommendation?

Otherwise, this is clear and useful.
Thank you,
Joel