Re: [sidr] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-sidr-slurm-07: (with COMMENT)

2018-04-06 Thread Spencer Dawkins at IETF
Hi, Di, On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 9:33 AM, Di Ma wrote: > Alissa, > > Thanks very much for your comments. > > Is BCP 14 exactly the same document as RFC 2119? It was, until https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8174 was added to BCP 14. That's the process doc that says readers don't have to figure out

Re: [sidr] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol-07: (with COMMENT)

2017-02-16 Thread Spencer Dawkins at IETF
Hi, Tim (responding here, but I also saw Oleg's reply), On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 9:26 AM, Tim Bruijnzeels wrote: > Hi Spencer, all, > > On 16 Feb 2017, at 06:47, Spencer Dawkins > wrote: > > > > Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for > > draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol-07:

Re: [sidr] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol-21: (with COMMENT)

2017-01-13 Thread Spencer Dawkins at IETF
You folks are headed in the right direction. I'll be happy wherever you end up. Thanks! Spencer On Thursday, January 12, 2017, Randy Bush wrote: > >>Note that BGPsec update messages can be quite large, therefore any > >>BGPsec speaker announcing the capability to receive BGPsec message

Re: [sidr] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-ops-14: (with COMMENT)

2017-01-04 Thread Spencer Dawkins at IETF
Hi, Randy, On Jan 4, 2017 18:21, "Randy Bush" wrote: you are at the intersection (well actially union) of two twisty sets of passages, bgp routing and internet ops. > I'm wondering if "the transitive closure of a client's customers" has > a precise meaning. I know what a customer is, at the han