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

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

Hi Paul,

Thank you for your review and comments. 

Regarding the Reserved Field change, we, co-authors of this draft, also think that current text needs to be modified to specify what exactly is being updated. Roman made a similar comment on this, and we will update the first paragraph of Section 6.3 with the following text:
   [RFC4872] reserved a 32-bit field in the PROTECTION object header. 
   Subsequently, [RFC4873] allocated several fields from that field, and 
   left the remainder of the bits reserved. This specification further 
   allocates the preemption priority field from those formerly-reserved bits.  
   The 32-bit field in the PROTECTION object defined in [RFC4873] are 
   updated as follows:

Regarding a new IANA registry for the "Notification and Operational Bits," we agree that it is a bit late for that.   


Best regards,

Jeong-dong





-----Original Message-----
From:  "Paul Wouters via Datatracker" <[e-mail]>
To:     "The IESG" <[e-mail]>; 
Cc:      <[e-mail]>;   <[e-mail]>;   <[e-mail]>;   <[e-mail]>;   <[e-mail]>; 
Sent:  2022-04-05 (화) 05:47:04 (UTC+09:00)
Subject: Paul Wouters' No Objection on draft-ietf-teas-gmpls-signaling-smp-11: (with COMMENT)

Paul Wouters 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:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I came in a bit late as incoming AD, but happy to see that most review comments
were addressed. I think the wording about the Reserved Field changes could be
improved a little (there are 4 different Reserved fields, although only one is
16 bit in size), although it is clear enough to understand which field was
meant.

It would have been nice if the "Notification and Operational Bits" had been an
IANA registry, so it could have been updated more clearly without repeating a
lot of text from the RFC being updated. Especially if more bits are going to be
used in the future. But it is a bit late for that now as it would require more
updated text for the generic handling of the bits along with fields in the IANA
registry for the bit specific behaviours (eg the setting of N and O bit)