On Tue, 9 Sep 2014 00:29:01 +0000, "Acee Lindem (acee)"
<[email protected]> wrote:
This version includes clarifications in response to Tony Przygienda¹s
comments as well as some editorial changes. There are no changes to
the
protocol extensions.
Thanks,
Acee
On 9/8/14, 2:27 PM, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]>
wrote:
A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-ospf-prefix-link-attr-01.txt
has been successfully submitted by Acee Lindem and posted to the
IETF repository.
nit:
: these prefixes and links may or not be
suggest to replace with
these prefixes and links may or _may_ not be
Otherwise, yepp, I like the changes, they do not prescribe how to deal
with specific duplicates too tightly but tight enough such as
mandating the drafts hinging off this
draft to deal with the anomalies. the coupling of opaque flooding scope
with prefix flooding scope is nicely done, it basically says
application must
make sure it floods @ correct scope but not preventing putting
different
types @ same flooding scope into same opaque.
I think all my concerns have been addressed pretty nicely.
--- tony
Name: draft-ietf-ospf-prefix-link-attr
Revision: 01
Title: OSPFv2 Prefix/Link Attribute Advertisement
Document date: 2014-09-08
Group: ospf
Pages: 14
URL:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ospf-prefix-link-attr-01.tx
t
Status:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ospf-prefix-link-attr/
Htmlized:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ospf-prefix-link-attr-01
Diff:
http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-ospf-prefix-link-attr-01
Abstract
_______________________________________________
OSPF mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
