Gorry Fairhurst has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-lisp-te-21: Discuss
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lisp-te/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCUSS: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCUSS 1: I'd like to understand why this has been requested for publication as EXP? I may have missed this, but I didn't see any new protocol definitions. I do note it was chartered as an experimental extension, yet I see no explanation of why this is an experiment, nor how that experiment may in the future be declared as a success or failure. Whatever the reason, can this reason to be noted in the abstract and to be described in the introduction? DISCUSS 2: Since this is targeting EXP, what is the nature of the EXP specification: is it for a limited duration? A limited use-case? A limited scope of deployment? i.e., what is the experiment and can this document define implicit or explicit success/failure criteria, and an outcome that can be used as the basis for a future recommendation to the IETF community? DISCUSS 3: Section 7 is about a topic that I do not see explained. If this is important enough to include, please specify this. The informational reference to the ELP-probing mechanism details in [I-D.filyurin-lisp-elp-probing] seems insufficient and since this reference has expired (in 2018) as a non-WG I-D, can the whole section be removed? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I'd strongly encourage changing the opening sentence of section 2, to insert the word “Experimental” before extension, "Informational" if the document were changed to target this. Please consider the following: - Please do expand the word LISP in the title - Please expand LISP in the abstract. - Please also define all abbreviations on first use, I expect this will hardly increase the word count much and can save reader pain. _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list -- lisp@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to lisp-le...@ietf.org
