Hi Roni,
>> I was wondering if this document should say that it updates RFC5561
>> (specifically section 10)
Yes, section 10 of RFC 5561 talks about ipv4-enabling by default in LDP unless
disabled explicitly.
The RFC however does not specify any extension/procedure as per se for this.
Our I.D.
Looks good.
Thanks,
Dan
From: Tal Mizrahi [mailto:ta...@marvell.com]
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2014 8:01 AM
To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); gen-art@ietf.org; Karen ODonoghue
(odonog...@isoc.org); Yaakov Stein (yaako...@rad.com); Brian Haberman
(br...@innovationslab.net)
Cc: draft-ietf-tictoc-security-
In your previous mail you wrote:
> Thanks, Francis, for the review.
>
> > first a meta-question: should this kind of documents refer to its
> > parent, RFC 6237 (same subject but RFC 6237 is Experimental, the
> > I-D is for Standards Track)? IMHO it should not (so the I-D is
> > right)
Thanks Les -
Robert -
-Original Message-
From: Robert Sparks [mailto:rjspa...@nostrum.com]
Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2014 8:14 AM
To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); draft-ietf-isis-tlv-codepoi...@tools.ietf.org;
isis...@ietf.org; General Area Review Team
Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] Gen-art LC revie
Thanks, Francis, for the review.
> first a meta-question: should this kind of documents refer to its
> parent, RFC 6237 (same subject but RFC 6237 is Experimental, the
> I-D is for Standards Track)? IMHO it should not (so the I-D is
> right) because this will be (only) mentioned in the RFC ind
