On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 6:58 AM Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
wrote:
> John - Thank you for the followup.
>
> Murray - my sincere apologies for not responding to your comments. I
> remember reviewing your email but somehow I lost track of it and never
> responded.
>
> I have posted V7 of the draft to
org
> Subject: Re: [Teas] Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-lsr-isis-
> rfc5316bis-04: (with COMMENT)
>
> Hi Les and other authors,
>
> I didn’t see a reply to Murray’s comment. It’s not a DISCUSS so not
> mandatory for you to reply but it would be appreciated.
>
Hi Les and other authors,
I didn’t see a reply to Murray’s comment. It’s not a DISCUSS so not mandatory
for you to reply but it would be appreciated.
Of Murray’s comments, I personally don’t think RFC 7981 needs to be normative,
the test being that if you never looked at 7981 you’d still know
