Hi Murray,

I have uploaded a new revision that clarifies the IANA section.

-----Original Message-----
From: Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker <nore...@ietf.org> 
Sent: mercredi 26 août 2020 21:01
To: The IESG <i...@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-bess-rfc5549revis...@ietf.org; bess-cha...@ietf.org; 
bess@ietf.org; Matthew Bocci <matthew.bo...@nokia.com>
Subject: Murray Kucherawy's Discuss on draft-ietf-bess-rfc5549revision-04: 
(with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Murray Kucherawy has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-bess-rfc5549revision-04: Discuss

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-bess-rfc5549revision/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

An easy one, but necessary IMHO:

I'm confused by the IANA Considerations section.  It looks like a verbatim copy 
from RFC 5549 which made the original registration for "Extended Next Hop 
Encoding", but this isn't actually a new registration.  Shouldn't this 
therefore be something like the following?

NEW:

RFC 5549 added "Extended Next Hop Encoding" to the Capability Codes registry, 
which was created by [RFC5492].  IANA is requested to update the definition of 
that entry to refer instead to this document.


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

Thanks for this document.  It was easy to read even for people like me who 
don't get involved in routing too much.

Thank you also for the shepherd writeup, which (unlike most lately) actually 
answered the question "Why is this the proper type of RFC?"




_______________________________________________
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

Reply via email to