Re: [Lsr] AD review of draft-ietf-lsr-dynamic-flooding-14

2024-02-07 Thread Tony Li
Hi John, > You’re welcome and thank you for your careful reply, and also for the > additional polishing. I’ve just reviewed the diff, it looks good. Just a few > things to note in the revision, below. Thanks again for your comments. Please see inline. > ### Section 5.1.1 > > • 1-127:

Re: [Lsr] AD review of draft-ietf-lsr-dynamic-flooding-14

2024-02-07 Thread John Scudder
Hi Tony and all, On rereading my comments about Section 6.7, it occurred to me that I ignored distributed mode. I can see that in that mode, the concept of "old" and "new" topology does make sense, isn't hard to nail down, and in that context, paragraph two makes sense. My comments continue to

Re: [Lsr] AD review of draft-ietf-lsr-dynamic-flooding-14

2024-02-06 Thread John Scudder
Hi Tony, > On Feb 6, 2024, at 7:43 PM, Tony Li wrote: > > Thank you for your fantastic comments. Please see inline. You’re welcome and thank you for your careful reply, and also for the additional polishing. I’ve just reviewed the diff, it looks good. Just a few things to note in the revisio

Re: [Lsr] AD review of draft-ietf-lsr-dynamic-flooding-14

2024-02-06 Thread Tony Li
John, Thank you for your fantastic comments. Please see inline. > +++ draft-ietf-lsr-dynamic-flooding-14-jgs-comments.txt 2024-01-24 > 07:16:47.0 -0500 > @@ -231,6 +231,10 @@ >The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", >"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "R