Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-bfd-multipoint-18: 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-bfd-multipoint/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Firstly, thank you for writing this - I've never needed this functionality, but can see where it would be useful. I fully support Mirja's DISCUSS - there should to be more text not just around congesting links, but also not shooting yourself in the foot with too many / too frequent packets. Ben's DISCUSS is also needs to be addressed. Comments: 1: "All other information MAY be determined dynamically." I don't think that a 2119-style MAY works here - I'd suggest "All other information can be determined dynamically." (or even just a lowercase may) 2: Section 5.7: "Bootstrapping BFD session to multipoint MPLS LSP in case of penultimate hop popping may use control plane, e.g., as described in [I-D.ietf-bess-mvpn-fast-failover], and is outside the scope of this document." "may use control plane" doesn't parse for me. Perhaps "may use *the* control plane"? I'm actually not sure what you are trying to say here, so that might not fix it. I also have some nits: Section 1: O: Term "connectivity" in this document P: The term "connectivity" in this document
