IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Teas] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-teas-assoc-corouted-bidir-frr-06: (with COMMENT)

"Rakesh Gandhi (rgandhi)" <rgandhi@cisco.com> Fri, 26 October 2018 15:40 UTC

Return-Path: <rgandhi@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3427C1298C5; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 08:40:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.971
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.971 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.47, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 296m3cD6b9kr; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 08:39:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-7.cisco.com (alln-iport-7.cisco.com [173.37.142.94]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5FB18128CF3; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 08:39:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1964; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1540568398; x=1541777998; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=aMC9dD6T2TJ7DFaB5SlUgqbIBSCi8dPPDJLaOpLXzKA=; b=SIbG2jt0EkRGsMpYDy8Ma/9eN0JcQ+IWKpOcHBJHVuzMMQE+LlFs+6X+ KuW8BtKGO9YfclZl/Zenuz99Pwg9Vvy7PJAiRFIXVrQ06m9SD/doOWR5m 5VjDB+wGftOq7VdwsbGKTJdPDooOaelIyTY4suXmA2ZKIN6iXkvv6Y7No Y=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AEAADHNNNb/4QNJK1jGgEBAQEBAgEBAQEHAgEBAQGBUQUBAQEBCwGCBGZ/KAqDa4gYjBiBaIkijiAUgWYLAQElhEcCF4MBITQNDQEDAQECAQECbRwMhTsGIxE3DhACAQgaAiYCAgIfERUQAgQBDQWDIQGBaQMVD6YygS6EPkCCeQ2CEwWBC4pdF4FBP4E4DBOCTIJWRQIBAgGBKgESAR8Xgm0xgiYCiHiLbolKIS4JAoZngx+DUIMnGIFShHeJfIxtfYkBAhEUgSYdOGRYEQhwFWUBgkGCT4hKhT5vAYsFgR+BHwEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.54,428,1534809600"; d="scan'208";a="191460404"
Received: from alln-core-10.cisco.com ([173.36.13.132]) by alln-iport-7.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 26 Oct 2018 15:39:57 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-020.cisco.com (xch-rcd-020.cisco.com [173.37.102.30]) by alln-core-10.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id w9QFdvH1007538 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 26 Oct 2018 15:39:57 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-018.cisco.com (173.36.7.28) by XCH-RCD-020.cisco.com (173.37.102.30) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1395.4; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:39:56 -0500
Received: from xch-aln-018.cisco.com ([173.36.7.28]) by XCH-ALN-018.cisco.com ([173.36.7.28]) with mapi id 15.00.1395.000; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:39:56 -0500
From: "Rakesh Gandhi (rgandhi)" <rgandhi@cisco.com>
To: Spencer Dawkins <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
CC: "draft-ietf-teas-assoc-corouted-bidir-frr@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-teas-assoc-corouted-bidir-frr@ietf.org>, Vishnu Beeram <vishnupavan@gmail.com>, "teas-chairs@ietf.org" <teas-chairs@ietf.org>, "teas@ietf.org" <teas@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-teas-assoc-corouted-bidir-frr-06: (with COMMENT)
Thread-Index: AQHUbAvhO2wmYfP9t0CyY8QuRA/0XqUxvPCA
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2018 15:39:56 +0000
Message-ID: <8EBE4191-B8F1-4677-9CD1-C42A6E450DAE@cisco.com>
References: <154043513502.6899.3227532584938668994.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <154043513502.6899.3227532584938668994.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.1d.0.161209
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.82.249.236]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <E311BE948D10C04AA9618E6572868762@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.30, xch-rcd-020.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-10.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/BrAQC3Ial92zWB9nXBUNQgvyfPY>
Subject: Re: [Teas] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-teas-assoc-corouted-bidir-frr-06: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: teas@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Traffic Engineering Architecture and Signaling working group discussion list <teas.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/teas>, <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/teas/>
List-Post: <mailto:teas@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas>, <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2018 15:40:00 -0000

Hi Spencer,

Thank you for your review.

Sure, we will re-order the first and second section.

Thanks,
Rakesh


On 2018-10-24, 10:38 PM, "Spencer Dawkins" <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

    Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for
    draft-ietf-teas-assoc-corouted-bidir-frr-06: 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-teas-assoc-corouted-bidir-frr/
    
    
    
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    COMMENT:
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    I agree with Ben's comment about the unconventional document structure. I'm not
    an expert, but I think I understood the Introduction well enough to get through
    it before needing to look at the terminology for precise meanings, and it does
    seem odd compared to the vast majority of RFCs I've reviewed, so somewhat
    disorienting for readers.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email