Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-opsawg-l3sm-l3nm-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-opsawg-l3sm-l3nm/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for the many updates in the -12 through -14. Just one final comment on the new changes: Section 7.6.3 The L3NM supports the configuration of one or more IPv4/IPv6 static routes. Since the same structure is used for both IPv4 and IPv6, it was considered to have one single container to group both static entries independently of their address family, but that design was abandoned to ease the mapping with the structure in [RFC8299]. This paragraph appears both at the end of 7.6.3 and at the start of 7.6.3.1; presumably only the latter is needed. _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
