[trill] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-trill-centralized-replication-12: (with COMMENT)

Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> Wed, 10 January 2018 21:27 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-trill-centralized-replication@ietf.org, trill-chairs@ietf.org, d3e3e3@gmail.com, trill@ietf.org
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <151561967281.5667.14127722614840254715.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 13:27:52 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/trill/dPi0XHnqRYV7rMB3EjUryOsAbHU>
Subject: [trill] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-trill-centralized-replication-12: (with COMMENT)

Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-trill-centralized-replication-12: 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-trill-centralized-replication/



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

TRILL is pretty far outside my area of expertise, so I might be simply
misunderstanding the protocol extension model here, but it seems to me that the
changes to the RPF port calculation represent a formal update to RFC6325. If
so, the metadata and abstract should indicate that.

[trill] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-t… Adam Roach
Re: [trill] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ie… Donald Eastlake