Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-rtgwg-bgp-pic-12

Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com> Sun, 13 December 2020 17:38 UTC

Return-Path: <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAE7E3A0816; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 09:38:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.197
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.197 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6-QURcCqbWe2; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 09:38:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lf1-x135.google.com (mail-lf1-x135.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::135]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A89E3A0813; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 09:38:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lf1-x135.google.com with SMTP id x20so4826167lfe.12; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 09:38:20 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=KSCDcHlNdxdE8UA7RDrPDrsaX5Q5OYn0ei4qnYTMIEs=; b=C3RCLr4k71BQPi9iBA6HTtiM4ID6TgTzSDgPZkieiadkWtpEHbSzNMphE6qx5pbW+4 q1Y7Cn/q3PmC7XRevrOyPEPuELzNzK0D0lAPeIggCQHJV/fF1EijvH23Gbu+6RYNHJc7 Jf7TYs1qa+f6bZxDA99nFJefYBMhTvdUVSHgWnzpXkJQQnHAfrbo6mKpXyiqbYtmqmli SI/CBVDFv6uqD1XImC4K81QJMJUrYPHSlHED6XEJLGXXHLOeIsN9pO73vHAQN0VFIi2V X8Q+I0DcWibP9+jUlhVLLOn2tRd2MolUXgD948oMg1ALgxzTqwG/YuDhtsGwOwsDCBpz WAoA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=KSCDcHlNdxdE8UA7RDrPDrsaX5Q5OYn0ei4qnYTMIEs=; b=RKpplWT+6B9Vjczpb6EmzRoPWg01I/79WwZHEJluDL0dIU68bIuyrxMXVkmu08qMdZ kIHJoMb1AtVNsDKvM6Hhw+0RxzoJhtbY0kuflHg80N0PqxoSHKmZXOTt7XZ6ektE8B3l DOYQVlPDhPPb+lL1lSZGHEpnQ1q7WGUAqNO8QGQRX4tizOFkFqf/btyHy1GKb9pfnJcE Jju0yr2lcnYK41iciwTjD3E2vNTzZYxiB8fGi0ktpflLlhDnvK/0wNbqv7B8/mSfKJ4J X10HkZsfQRiIgyn7/os+io4W+LHvXgAhzZTSpZpdv6v9cAguYbtCbaitBTKjX31qIrxy DSOA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533RYWY9dxNtgXLcU0w4ZbSfA1XC+W0mPqnrcnw/Fmju/Qg5YtB6 L2QKRPwOUeJsuT2T2I+wygUa5ueJ7OFsNPurAg4=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyyCHaJy0oeYS08SvtBUT6Bb5eyoAhL9u4nVUJD5jwXxao8w2uQyPQmFZfjQS0U8kocHep+3qImQYunpldrT9U=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:318b:: with SMTP id i11mr7527551lfe.364.1607881099077; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 09:38:19 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <f313819b-08f1-4797-a58f-d3a10520de37@Spark> <29804aa2-bc5f-4bc7-8eae-551d835a8d68@Spark>
In-Reply-To: <29804aa2-bc5f-4bc7-8eae-551d835a8d68@Spark>
From: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2020 09:38:09 -0800
Message-ID: <CA+RyBmXmVbMSBvXb2TTAF2SaWuVdWD=hUKhWRATuSkLPBDX1oQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-rtgwg-bgp-pic-12
To: Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: RTGWG <rtgwg@ietf.org>, Routing WG <rtgwg-chairs@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-rtgwg-bgp-pic@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c06f1105b65bfd7f"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtgwg/8hXAVguSWQqxPibJolZFxBmR-sw>
X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Area Working Group <rtgwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtgwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtgwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2020 17:38:23 -0000

Hi,
I've read the document and believe it is ready for publication. Several
notes after the reading:

   - authors might consider changing references to list IETF documents
   rather than enumerating them in the list of references. For example, use
   [RFC5036] instead of [4].
   - Because the ability to realize the described technique depends on
   using the specific HW, I think that should be reflected in the Abstract.
   Perhaps following the very last sentence:

It is noteworthy to mention that the benefits of BGP-PIC are
hinged on the existence of more than one path whether as ECMP or
primary-backup.


   - And because, as I understand, the document describes a
   particular implementation, an Experimental track might be used rather than
   the Informational.

Regards,
Greg

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 8:26 PM Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Dear RTGWG,
>
> The authors have requested  WGLC for draft-ietf-rtgwg-bgp-pic.
>
> There was consensus that document is ready for the last call, the authors
> have addressed all the comments received, IPR statements have been
> submitted.
> Please indicate support or no-support by December 28, 2020.
>
> Cheers,
> Jeff and Chris
> _______________________________________________
> rtgwg mailing list
> rtgwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
>