[Pce] Re: Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-native-ip-34: (with COMMENT)

[John Scudder <[e-mail]>]

Hi Authors,

I think you might have overlooked replying to Murray’s question.

—John

> On Aug 22, 2024, at 2:39 AM, Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> 
> Murray Kucherawy has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-native-ip-34: 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://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!CB1o2jlxBvTh_Pxjyzg_DCX1oY1AUsUhpAhzalTBCr84oba8fUeDGriejxGLpyCDl4PbiJ1u4pva$
> for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> 
> 
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-native-ip/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!CB1o2jlxBvTh_Pxjyzg_DCX1oY1AUsUhpAhzalTBCr84oba8fUeDGriejxGLpyCDl4PbiLZbCgGX$
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> The SHOULD in Section 10 and the RECOMMENDED in Section 7.3 seem to be
> unsupported.  Why might an implementer choose not to do what they say?  What's
> the impact to interoperability?
> 
> I echo Roman's question about the document's status.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pce mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]