Hi Erik,
thanks for your comments, please see inline (##PP):
On 21/09/2025 00:01, Erik Kline via Datatracker wrote:
Erik Kline has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce-09: 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-igp-ureach-prefix-announce/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
# Internet AD comments for draft-ietf-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce-09
CC @ekline
* comment syntax:
- https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments/blob/main/format.md
* "Handling Ballot Positions":
- https://ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/
## Comments
### S5.1,5.2
* It seems to me that using the letters "UP" to mean "no, actually down"
could bring no small amount of confusion.
But I assume the working group discussed options and this was the best
that could achieve consensus.
##PP
I suppose you are referring to "UP-flag" name and yes that name was
selected based on the consensus of the WG.
## Nits
### S1
* "reachability of the summary address" ->
"reachability of the summary prefix"
##PP
done.
thanks,
Peter
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
