Hi Murray, Thanks for your review and comments.Please see inline.
Original From: MurrayKucherawyviaDatatracker <[email protected]> To: The IESG <[email protected]>; Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>;[email protected] <[email protected]>;[email protected] <[email protected]>; Date: 2024年10月17日 11:23 Subject: Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo-12: (with COMMENT) Murray Kucherawy has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo-12: 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-bfd-unaffiliated-echo/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I support Roman's DISCUSS. The SHOULD in Section 2 appears to be re-stating advice from RFC 5880. I suggest not using SHOULD here if that advice is simply being carried forward, since you already refer back to that document whose advice is still in effect. Or if you're actually tweaking that advice here, I suggest being more explicit that that's what's going on. [XM]>>> OK. Will do s/SHOULD/should. Cheers, Xiao Min
