LGTM On Jul 20, 2016 5:15 PM, "Susan Hares" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Works for me! > > Sue > > -----Original Message----- > From: Joel M. Halpern [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2016 8:56 AM > To: Joe Clarke; Susan Hares; 'Russ White'; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [i2rs] Comments on Ephemeral-REQ-07 (local config vs. > ephemeral) > > That text works for me. > Thanks, > Joel > > On 7/20/16 8:52 AM, Joe Clarke wrote: > > On 7/20/16 07:59, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > >> The text I comment to says "individual ephemeral configuration > >> changes" - I was not able to infer from this that it was supposed to > >> imply "individual I2RS clients". > > > > I agree with both you and Joel. "Individual" should apply to clients, > > but we need to have something that ties priority to local config. > > > > What about: > > > > Req-07: Local configuration MUST have a priority that is comparable > > with individual I2RS client priorities for making changes. This > > priority will determine whether local configuration changes or > > individual ephemeral configuration changes take precedence as described > in > RFC7921. > > The I2RS protocol MUST support his mechanism. > > > > Joe > > > > _______________________________________________ > i2rs mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs >
_______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
