Alvaro Retana has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut-12: 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-grow-bgp-gshut/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCUSS: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Why is this document not in the Standards Track? I ask because I think that the definition of a well-known community (one which has "global significance and their operations shall be implemented in any community-attribute-aware BGP speaker" [rfc1997], in other words, everywhere!) should result in a Standards Track specification, and not in an Informational document. I couldn't find any specific justification for the status in the writeups (Shepherd or Ballot), nor a related discussion in the archive. To resolve this DISCUSS, I would prefer to see a change in the status, but will yield to WG consensus (so a pointer to that discussion would be enough). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Nit: It would be very nice if the appendices were referenced in the text. _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list GROW@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
