Hi Eric,
On 5/11/20, 3:50 PM, "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <[email protected]> wrote: Peter, I will have a look for Alvaro's reply to Barry's comment then :) https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/EcufJn28CFrGkfQ2k6LUOYBcZXc/ Thanks, Acee The suggested text below will fix the nit indeed. Thank you -éric -----Original Message----- From: Peter Psenak <[email protected]> Date: Monday, 11 May 2020 at 19:14 To: Eric Vyncke <[email protected]>, The IESG <[email protected]> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "Acee Lindem (acee)" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc-12: (with COMMENT) Hi Eric, please see inline: On 11/05/2020 18:02, Éric Vyncke via Datatracker wrote: > Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc-12: No Objection > > 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/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Thank you for the work put into this document. The document is easy to read. > > Like other ADs, I wonder why the IS-IS and OSPF are separate documents. Alvaro has responded to similar query from Barry Leiba. > > Please find below one NIT. > > I hope that this helps to improve the document, > > Regards, > > -éric > > == NIT == > > -- section 4 -- > The "one" is ambiguous in "the router MUST advertise the smallest one." even if > we can guess that it is not "interface" ;-) ok, what would you like to say instead "one"? Would this be better: If a router has multiple interfaces with different capabilities of reading the maximum label stack depth, the router MUST advertise the smallest value found across all of its interfaces. thanks, Peter > > > > > _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
