Agree - I believe these comments apply to https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-msdc-08.txt Thanks, Acee
On 1/17/18, 4:18 PM, "rtgwg on behalf of Xufeng Liu" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: >Hi Benoit, > >The comments below from Tina seem to be for a different document. Could >you please double check? > >Thanks, >- Xufeng > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Benoit Claise [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2018 4:28 AM >> To: The IESG <[email protected]> >> Cc: [email protected]; Yingzhen Qu >> <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]; >> [email protected]; [email protected] >> Subject: Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-rip-08: >>(with >> COMMENT) >> >> Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for >> draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-rip-08: 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/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html >> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >> >> >> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-rip/ >> >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> COMMENT: >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> OPS DIR review from Tina: >> >> I found this document well written to be READY for publication as an >> informational document. >> >> Some nits: >> >> 4.2 eBGP Labeled Unicast (RFC8277) >> >> Each node peers with its neighbors via a eBGP session >> >> should be >> >> Each node peers with its neighbors via an eBGP session >> >> 7. Addressing the open problems >> >> the same could be re-used in context of >> other domains as well >> >> A period is missing in the end. >> >> Are the centralized controller and centralized agent the same >>components? >> >> Even though the design in this document is specified for same domain, >>it would >> be useful to develop an approach for inter-domain without leaking >>intra-domain >> topology and policy. >> >> Have this feature been included or being aligned with carrier grade FIB >>in FD.io >> VPP https://wiki.fd.io/view/VPP ? >> > >_______________________________________________ >rtgwg mailing list >[email protected] >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg _______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
