Hi, Many thanks for the changes. Best Regards, Meral
> -----Original Message----- > From: Job Snijders [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2016 4:10 AM > To: Meral Shirazipour <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: Re: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-idr-deprecate-30-31-129-00 > > Dear Meral, > > A new version of the draft has been published to address your comments. > Please review the diff here: > > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-idr-deprecate-30-31-129-01 > > On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 12:35:40AM +0000, Meral Shirazipour wrote: > > Summary: > > This draft is ready to be published as Standards Track RFC but I have some > comments. > > > > Major issues: > > > > Minor issues: > > -[Page 2]: > > "This has led to deployment problems for new technologies such as > > Large BGP Communities [I-D.ietf-idr-large-community]." > > > > Not sure if draft-ietf-idr-large-community explains the issues caused > > by the use of these attribute values ? If yes it would be good to > > point to that section. If not it would be good to add short summary > > here. > > A short summary has been added. > > > Nits/editorial comments: > > -[Page 2], Section 4 please refer to latest version of > > [I-D.ietf-idr-large-community]. > > I mistakenly linked to -08 (while -11 is the latest version), this will be > corrected > before publication. > > > -[Page 2]: > > "The squatting of values 30, 31, 129, 241, 242 and 243 has been > > confirmed by the involved vendors or through source code review." > > > > A bit confusing, somehow it seems 30 is already deprecated as per: > > https://www.ietf.org/assignments/bgp-parameters/bgp-parameters.xml > > with reference to [draft-ietf-idr-large-community]. > > The switch between used of 30 to use of 32 happened between v04 and > > v05 of [draft-ietf-idr-large-community]? > > Perhaps > > https://www.ietf.org/assignments/bgp-parameters/bgp-parameters.xml > > should be updated to point to this draft instead? > > Yes, I expect IANA to remove the reference to Large Communities behind > 30 (because Large no longer has anything to do with value 30, and indeed we > want to prevent confusion), and reference this document, if approved for > publication. > > Kind regards, > > Job _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
