Dear Chairs and WG, I have read the new version and I support the WGLC. Some editorial suggestions are as following shown. In section 5.1, "Where: <cci-list> is as per [I-D.ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller]." It may update to RFC9050. In section 5.1, "Further only one and one kind of BPI, EPR, or PPA object MUST be present." It is a little confused. Maybe that can be changed to "One BPI, EPR, or PPA object MUST be present and others should be ignored."
Best Regards, Quan <<[Pce] WGLC for draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-native-ip-20 <<Dhruv Dhody <[email protected]> Tue, 16 May 2023 22:16 UTCShow header Hi WG, This email starts a 2-weeks working group last call for draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-native-ip-20 [1]. Please indicate your support or concern for this draft. If you are opposed to the progression of the draft to RFC, please articulate your concern. If you support it, please indicate that you have read the latest version and it is ready for publication in your opinion. As always, review comments and nits are most welcome. The WG LC will end on Wednesday 31st May 2023. We will also notify the IDR WG about this WGLC. A general reminder to the WG to be more vocal during the last-call/adoption and help us unclog our queues :) Thanks, Dhruv & Julien [1]https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-native-ip/ _______________________________________________ Pce mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
