All good by me, thanks. I don't think any of my comments were of the "must be addressed" variety.
Regards, -ek On Wed, Dec 8, 2021 at 3:20 PM Mankamana Mishra (mankamis) <manka...@cisco.com> wrote: > > Hi Eric, > > Please let me know if explanation are acceptable. > > > > Mankamana > > > > From: Mankamana Mishra (mankamis) <manka...@cisco.com> > Date: Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 12:06 PM > To: Erik Kline <ek.i...@gmail.com>, The IESG <i...@ietf.org> > Cc: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org > <draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org>, bess-cha...@ietf.org > <bess-cha...@ietf.org>, bess@ietf.org <bess@ietf.org>, > slitkows.i...@gmail.com <slitkows.i...@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: Erik Kline's No Objection on > draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy-14: (with COMMENT) > > Hi Erik, > > Thanks for comment . Please find inline comment. Please let me know if you > have additional comment > > > > > > From: Erik Kline via Datatracker <nore...@ietf.org> > Date: Wednesday, October 27, 2021 at 6:18 PM > To: The IESG <i...@ietf.org> > Cc: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org > <draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org>, bess-cha...@ietf.org > <bess-cha...@ietf.org>, bess@ietf.org <bess@ietf.org>, > slitkows.i...@gmail.com <slitkows.i...@gmail.com> > Subject: Erik Kline's No Objection on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy-14: > (with COMMENT) > > Erik Kline has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy-14: 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/blog/handling-iesg-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-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Generally no useful comments that others haven't already made. Thank > you for your patience, since I had pushed this out another week. > > [S4, comment] > > * I feel like some representative diagram to refer to throughout the > document might be useful earlier in the document, even if it's just > duplication of Figure 1 from section 5. > > Mankamana : Looking at other base document RFC 7432, 6613, 6614 I do not > think too many reference diagram are needed. Is there any specific area where > you think having diagram would help ? > > > > > > [S9.*] > > * Should it be said that if the Multicast Source Length is not zero > then it MUST be equal to the Multicast Group Length? I.e. no > mixing and matching IPv4 and IPv6 source/group addresses by accident? > > Mankamana : originally carrying multicast route over BGP is defined in RFC > 6513 and RFC6514.I did not find any clarification in these document as well, > do we really need to be explicit that mix and match not allowed or go with > standard practice ? Mix and match not working are true for PIM as well. > > _______________________________________________ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
