[pim] John Scudder's No Objection on draft-ietf-pim-rfc8736bis-02: (with COMMENT)

John Scudder via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Wed, 17 May 2023 17:18 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: pim@ietf.org
Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E82FC151065; Wed, 17 May 2023 10:18:24 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: John Scudder via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-pim-rfc8736bis@ietf.org, pim-chairs@ietf.org, pim@ietf.org, mmcbride7@gmail.com, mmcbride7@gmail.com
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 10.3.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: John Scudder <jgs@juniper.net>
Message-ID: <168434390404.44084.14458535620168347475@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 17 May 2023 10:18:24 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pim/m6cBqZ7J1yFDUQ2VeAogNcTF00U>
Subject: [pim] John Scudder's No Objection on draft-ietf-pim-rfc8736bis-02: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast <pim.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pim>, <mailto:pim-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pim/>
List-Post: <mailto:pim@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pim-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim>, <mailto:pim-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 May 2023 17:18:24 -0000

John Scudder has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-pim-rfc8736bis-02: 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/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ 
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pim-rfc8736bis/



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

Thanks for this document. I have one minor concern I'd like to mention. You
define 13.0 through 15.15 as type.subtype. I assume that each of the 48
distinct type.subtype tuples is intended to have the exact same semantics as
the "legacy" 0-12 type space, that is, each type.subtype is logically distinct,
they are nothing more and nothing less than an extension mechanism. In
particular, there is no significance if two different ones match on the type
value but are different on the subtype value, it's really just an 8 bit number
whose high-order nibble happens to be d, e, or f.

Probably this is obvious enough as it stands, but it seems like it might help,
and wouldn't hurt, to state it explicitly.