[Pals] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-pals-vpls-pim-snooping-05: (with COMMENT)

Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> Wed, 07 June 2017 22:06 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-pals-vpls-pim-snooping@ietf.org, Andrew Malis <agmalis@gmail.com>, pals-chairs@ietf.org, agmalis@gmail.com, pals@ietf.org
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <149687317778.25640.689249469535631994.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2017 15:06:17 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pals/9DgG4ZXnZ2nse1Cudj-aUsDqp2A>
Subject: [Pals] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-pals-vpls-pim-snooping-05: (with COMMENT)

Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-pals-vpls-pim-snooping-05: 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-pals-vpls-pim-snooping/



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

My understanding is that the upcoming change to move from RFC 4601 to RFC 7761
makes section 2.3.3 no longer relevant. I presume it will be removed?

Editorial nit: section 2.4.1 uses the abbreviation "J/P" without defining it.
Suggest expanding.

[Pals] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-pa… Adam Roach
Re: [Pals] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-iet… Olivier Dornon