[spring] John Scudder's No Objection on draft-ietf-spring-nsh-sr-12: (with COMMENT)

[John Scudder via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

John Scudder has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-spring-nsh-sr-12: 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-spring-nsh-sr/



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

Thanks for the discussion of whether to use a UDP encap to save an IP protocol
number. I've cleared; the previous comment still stands though:

Related to the DISCUSS question, it seems as though a few words would be in
order, early in the document, about the encapsulation. I do see (now that Jim
pointed it out to me OOB :-) that Section 11.1 requests an IP protocol number
from IANA, and the rest is arguably "obvious". Nonetheless, it seems worth a
few sentences.

Obviously, if Stewart's suggestion to move to a UDP encap were used, that would
also call for a few sentences to describe it.