Re: [Teas] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-teas-gmpls-signaling-smp-11: (with COMMENT)

[Jeong-dong Ryoo <[e-mail]>]

Dear Éric,


Thank you for your review and comments.

The co-authors of this draft will move the last sentence of Section 3 to Section 1, and upload a revised draft shortly.


Best regards,

Jeong-dong (on behalf of the co-authors)


-----Original Message-----
From:  "Éric Vyncke via Datatracker" <[e-mail]>
To:     "The IESG" <[e-mail]>; 
Cc:      <[e-mail]>;   <[e-mail]>;   <[e-mail]>;   <[e-mail]>;   <[e-mail]>; 
Sent:  2022-04-04 (월) 16:36:21 (UTC+09:00)
Subject: Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-teas-gmpls-signaling-smp-11: (with COMMENT)

Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-teas-gmpls-signaling-smp-11: 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-teas-gmpls-signaling-smp/



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

Thank you for the work put into this document.

Please find below a very minor non-blocking COMMENT point, feel free to ignore.

Special thanks to Vishnu Beeram for the shepherd's write-up including the WG
consensus.

I hope that this helps to improve the document,

Regards,

-éric

## Section 1

While slightly out of context of this document, the operational differences
between between SMP and SMR would have been a plus. The last sentence of
section 3 would have been better in this introduction IMHO, but this is a
matter of taste ;-)