John,

Now that the I-D has been placed on the 1/4 telechat should I spin a new 
version that incorporates the  outstanding PRs:
https://github.com/ietf-wg-pce/draft-ietf-pce-pceps-tls13/pulls

spt

> On Dec 5, 2023, at 12:03, John Scudder <j...@juniper.net> wrote:
> 
> Hi Authors,
> 
> Thanks for this document. Looks good, I've requested IETF last call.
> 
> A couple of notes below, they didn't seem worth holding up the last call for, 
> but please consider them for your next revision.
> 
> - "what PCEPS implementations do if a PCEPS supports more than one version". 
> I don't think PCEPS (second occurrence) takes an article (i.e. referring to 
> "a PCEPS" is weird). Some rewrite seems called for, perhaps s/a PCEPS/one/.
> 
> - "neither the PCC nor the PCE should establish a PCEPS with
>   TLS connection with an unknown, unexpected, or incorrectly identified
>   peer;"
> 
> Isn't "PCEPS with TLS" redundant, doesn't the ess in PCEPS imply TLS? In 
> which case, just drop "with TLS". (See also, "ATM machine" :-)
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> —John

_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

Reply via email to