[mpls] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath-06: (with COMMENT)

[Mirja Kühlewind via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath-06: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I wanted to comment on the same sentence/normative requirement as Alvaro did in
his point (2). Given Alvaro's additional information that there is actually
even a technical conflict with this requirement, I think this should be address
before publication and might even be discuss-worthy. However, I'm really not an
expert on MPLS and therefore leave the decision to state a discuss ballot
position to potentially other, more knowledgable ADs.

Thanks for addressing the TSV-ART review comments (and thanks Jörg for the
review)! I support adding another sentence with a pointer to rate-limit
requirements in other docs. Thanks for proposing this change. Looking forward
this see this in the doc!