Subject: Re: [lisp] #70: Client not respecting RLOC weights (from Y. Rekhter's review)

From: "lisp issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 10:02:25 -0000

#70: Client not respecting RLOC weights (from Y. Rekhter's review)

Changes (by luigi@…):

  * status:  new => resolved
  * resolution:  => fixed

Comment:

 Authors replied on the mailinglist that in their opinion there is no need
 to make any change to the draft. Neither the original person that raised
 the issue nor the mailinglist stated a different opinion.

-- 
------------------------------------------+---------------------------------
Reporter:  luigi@…                        |        Owner:                 
    Type:  technical                      |       Status:  resolved       
Priority:  major                          |    Component:  draft-ietf-lisp
Severity:  -                              |   Resolution:  fixed          
Keywords:                                 |  
------------------------------------------+---------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/lisp/trac/ticket/70#comment:2>
lisp <http://tools.ietf.org/lisp/>
LISP WG document issues

---

From: "lisp issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 10:02:43 -0000

Changes (by luigi@…):

  * status:  resolved => closed

    Type:  technical                      |       Status:  closed         

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/lisp/trac/ticket/70#comment:3>
lisp <http://tools.ietf.org/lisp/>
LISP WG document issues

---

From: "lisp issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 19:09:59 -0000

Changes (by yakov@…):

  * status:  closed => reopened
  * resolution:  fixed =>

Comment:

 The issue raised in this ticket is still not addressed. Thus the ticket
 must stay open.

-- 
------------------------------------------+---------------------------------
Reporter:  luigi@…                        |        Owner:                 
    Type:  technical                      |       Status:  reopened       
Priority:  major                          |    Component:  draft-ietf-lisp
Severity:  -                              |   Resolution:                 
Keywords:                                 |  
------------------------------------------+---------------------------------

Ticket URL: <https://wiki.tools.ietf.org/wg/lisp/trac/ticket/70#comment:4>
lisp <http://tools.ietf.org/lisp/>
LISP WG document issues

---

From: "lisp issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2011 16:01:55 -0000

Comment(by yakov@…):

 Here is from the response to my original comment:

   Thank you for your contribution to draft-ietf-lisp-06.txt. The draft
 authors
   have reviewed your comments but do not feel that changes to the document
 are
   warranted at this time. Implementations must adhere to the
 specification.

 Note that the text I quoted above uses none of the ""MUST", "MUST NOT",
 "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED",
 "MAY", and
 "OPTIONAL". So, the text still does not say what is exactly required by
 the specification. Thus the spec has to replace "can" in "Client can
 only.." with one of the terms defined in rfc2119.

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/lisp/trac/ticket/70#comment:5>
lisp <http://tools.ietf.org/lisp/>
LISP WG document issues