Hi Roman, Thanks for the review. Version 06 addresses all your comments.
Please see in-line with [jorge]. Thx Jorge From: Roman Danyliw via Datatracker <[email protected]> Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2023 at 3:13 AM To: The IESG <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>, [email protected] <[email protected]>, [email protected] <[email protected]>, Sam Aldrin <[email protected]>, [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-nvo3-evpn-applicability-05: (with COMMENT) CAUTION: This is an external email. Please be very careful when clicking links or opening attachments. See the URL nok.it/ext for additional information. Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-nvo3-evpn-applicability-05: 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/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-nvo3-evpn-applicability/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thank you to Kyle Rose for the SECDIR review. ** Section 1. Editorial. Consider either expanding “TOR” (which I first read as an onion routing protocol) or use the “ToR” spelling that comes from https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/abbrev.expansion.txt. [jorge] done. ** Section 3. Typo. s/addresss/addresses/ [jorge] done ** Section 4.4 The Generic Network Virtualization Encapsulation [RFC8926] has been recommended to be the proposed standard for NVO3 Encapsulation. Recommended how? [jorge] replaced the sentence with: >The Generic Network Virtualization Encapsulation [RFC8926] is the proposed >standard encapsulation specified in the IETF Network Virtualization Overlays >Working Group. ** Section 4.4 The NVO3 encapsulation design team has made a recommendation in [I-D.ietf-nvo3-encap] for a control plane to: Practically, isn’t this a WG document? Shouldn’t this document make these recommendations? [jorge] changed to: > GENEVE requires a control plane [I-D.ietf-nvo3-encap] to:
_______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
