oh hai! it's been +2wks,with a bunch of folk saying: "yes please" and with some folk adding comments / suggestions ... that's good.
It looks like enough folk are 'for' and pretty much no one was 'against', (in the list at least), please can the author(s) kick out a new version with proper naming? thanks! -chris On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 1:49 AM, Ebben Aries <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes, support - Thank you for putting this together > > Few minor comments > > Section 1 > - Minor spelling/wording errors > - s/guidace/guidance/g > - s/with the requiring the explicity/with requiring the explicit/ > > Section 3 > - "Software MUST NOT require a configuration directive to operate in > this mode." - Since there could very well be a configuration option to > disable this capability (as noted in this same section), this should > rather be worded that this mode is default. It could very well be > delivered via a default and/or hidden configuration directive. (You may > also want to re-enable this capability after previously disabling it) > > /ebben > > On 11/01/2015 11:57 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote: >> Howdy Grow folk (again), >> Please consider this as the start of a 3wk working group adoption call >> for the subject draft who's abstract is: >> >> "This document defines the default behaviour of a BGP speaker when no >> explicit policy is associated with a BGP peering session." >> >> Please read/comment/advise before 11/23/2015 - Nov 23, 2015. >> >> Thanks! >> -chris >> grow-co-chair >> >> _______________________________________________ >> GROW mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow >> _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
