Hi Spencer, On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 3:32 PM, Spencer Dawkins <[email protected]> wrote: > > Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-trill-ecn-support-05: Yes > > ... > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > I agree with Mirja about the status of L4S, but would go even farther - L4S is > only one of the ECN experiments that https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc8311/ > was intended to accommodate, so you might want to capture that in the appendix > (basically saying "L4S is one example of the ways TRILL ECN handling may > evolve", or something like that).
OK. > Is > > If an RBridge supports ECN, for the two cases of an IP and a non-IPR > inner packet, the egress behavior is as follows: > > really "non-IPR"? I'm guessing it should be "non-IP". Yeah, probably not good to make last minutes changes in a draft while you are on vacation for a few days :-) > s/significnat/significant/ Thanks, Donald =============================== Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA [email protected] _______________________________________________ trill mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trill
