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

[Francesca Palombini via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Francesca Palombini 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 on this document.

Only one comment: I had the same reaction as Paul, I believe it would have been
good to create IANA registries for the LSP (Protection Type) Flags, although
that is really a comment on RFC 4872 (which by the way already uses what I
consider IANA-compliant terminology by stating "The following values are
defined.  All other values are reserved."). But since this is a general
comment, which can make more sense if other flags are expected to be defined in
the future, I leave it up to the working group and AD to make the best choice.

Francesca