Hi, I have read the document, and support the adoption.
One quick comments about the abstract section, it seems too details, it's better to more some of the content to the Introduction section. Best regards, Mach > -----Original Message----- > From: Pce [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > [email protected] > Sent: Monday, May 17, 2021 9:41 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [Pce] Adoption of draft-litkowski-pce-state-sync > > Dear all, > > The document draft-litkowski-pce-state-sync has reached the head of our > adoption queue > (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-litkowski-pce-state-sync/). > > Do you consider this I-D is a good foundation for a WG item? Please share your > feedback using the PCE mailing list by May 31. > > Regards, > > Dhruv & Julien > _______________________________________________ Pce mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
