Hi Paul, thanks for your comments, please see inline:
On 08/06/2023 03:55, Paul Wouters via Datatracker wrote:
Paul Wouters has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-lsr-ip-flexalgo-13: 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-lsr-ip-flexalgo/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- NITS: A node MUST participate in a Flex-Algorithm to be: - Able to compute path for such Flex-Algorithm - Part of the topology for such Flex-Algorithm This is an odd use of MUST.
what exactly is odd in it?
Section 5.2 states the length of the Algorithm field, but not of the Type: or Length: fields. (either do it for all or for none?) Similar in Section 6.2 and 6.3.1
fixed them all. thanks, Peter
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list Lsr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
