Hi Alvaro, et al. I support these changes, and thanks for taking this up.
I guess it makes sense to not go full-in and re-spin the base docs if there literally are no other changes (although one wonders if it will actually change things like CLIs if we don't). That said, quite a few errata exist for both of these documents. Maybe an even better way forward with these types of inclusivity updates, for base documents with errata, would be to re-spin the base doc incorporating the existing errata *and* the improved terminology. Thanks, Chris. Alvaro Retana <[email protected]> writes:
Hi! Mike, Acee, and I just uploaded a (very) short draft to update the master/slave terminology from rfc2328/rfc5340. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-fox-lsr-ospf-terminology/ As you all know, implementations use these terms as part of their CLI and debug output. The intent is to agree on common terminology. The draft currently only addresses that pair of terms, but we should also cover others, if any. Please comment and send any feedback. I would love to discuss this document over e-mail and, if possible, avoid taking meeting time in Vienna. Thanks! Alvaro. _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
