IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Teas] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-domain-subobjects-03: (with COMMENT)

Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> Tue, 17 November 2015 02:43 UTC

Return-Path: <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69D181ACD60; Mon, 16 Nov 2015 18:43:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 wZt71XfVT3kz; Mon, 16 Nov 2015 18:43:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-vk0-x22f.google.com (mail-vk0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::22f]) (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 884411ACD57; Mon, 16 Nov 2015 18:43:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: by vkbs1 with SMTP id s1so4024009vkb.3; Mon, 16 Nov 2015 18:43:01 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=l52rUTOYlmnyTxSOsfSt3UG6++ipjOl4AYfuZFl2eIY=; b=wsTTqHeox7LrLpNpgZqQemS9wA3szpV+tt/ZCdmQBly3KEB7kPb9+U6hFnaLj9UWGT J2WXR6ECFZtLg3Q9H4dhdkZox1zxU+WwctjxtnSR+iOsx7blEtKon494yOcChnoIc1AQ bqvG0YMdo8/Nkaadyr1UsDfu/ZKRnt7E1c6CIQBT9HXMFv1EXKrmlBZzfEvRnWIxwtlF HrCHBzuImZjn1ZIKTZe9tCVXRyoDzBhiI7vQgYQmmPOwf4gejtF7WSVSA/95EGHQKYz7 anDSvIex+PmsH00dB/pR8Q7FkX++8jwUIko7hOyYfQ/ZUGLoORgMbpni7iQHzAg8nRQd /lpg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.31.107.194 with SMTP id k63mr1266840vki.6.1447728181644; Mon, 16 Nov 2015 18:43:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.31.149.79 with HTTP; Mon, 16 Nov 2015 18:43:01 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20151117023622.11790.78501.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <20151117023622.11790.78501.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 20:43:01 -0600
Message-ID: <CAKKJt-ev_uCYvdhB0MGBaacSpFf3+3623uYChZUChxPVw7Af6Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114786c2ff96110524b37b2b"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/n-9viENLGYtc1hJjvBkk-qtD8Hw>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 08:28:59 -0800
Cc: teas-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-domain-subobjects@ietf.org, teas@ietf.org, vbeeram@juniper.net
Subject: Re: [Teas] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-domain-subobjects-03: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: teas@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 02:43:07 -0000

Sorry, I got this confused myself - what I meant was

On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 8:36 PM, Spencer Dawkins <
spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

> Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-domain-subobjects-03: 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-rsvp-te-domain-subobjects/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> In this text:
>
>    The new subobjects introduced by this document will not be understood
>    by legacy implementations.  If one of the subobjects is received in a
>    RSVP-TE object that does not understand it, it will behave as
>    described in [RFC3209] and [RFC4874].
>
> I think something is confused. Do RSVP-TE objects understand subobjects?
> Or is this
>
>    The new subobjects introduced by this document will not be understood
>    by legacy implementations.  If a legacy implementations receives one
>    of the subobjects in an RSVP-TE object that it does not understand,
> the
>    legacy implementation will behave as described in [RFC3209] and
> [RFC4874].
>
> correct?
>

   The new subobjects introduced by this document will not be understood
   by legacy implementations.  If a legacy implementation receives one
   of the subobjects that it does not understand in an RSVP-TE object,
the
   legacy implementation will behave as described in [RFC3209] and
[RFC4874].

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email