Subject: Re: [OSPF] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-autoconfig-13: (with COMMENT)

From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2015 16:00:47 +0000

Hi Alissa, 
Adrian had a similar comment and has suggested the following text:

OSPFv3 [OSPFV3] is a candidate for deployments in environments where
   auto-configuration is a requirement.  This document describes
   extensions to OSPFv3 to enable it to operate in these environments.
   In this mode of operation, the protocol is largely unchanged from the
   base OSPFv3 protocol specification [OSPFV3].

It will be in the next revision.

Thanks,
Acee

On 2/4/15, 4:36 PM, "Alissa Cooper" <[email-masked]> wrote:

>Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for
>draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-autoconfig-13: 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 http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
>for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>
>
>The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
>http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-autoconfig/
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>COMMENT:
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>= Section 1 =
>"OSPFv3 [OSPFV3] is a candidate for deployments in environments where
>   auto-configuration is a requirement.  Its operation is largely
>   unchanged from the base OSPFv3 protocol specification [OSPFV3]."
>
>The use of "its" here doesn't make a lot of sense -- a plain reading of
>this is that OSPFv3 is unchanged from OSPFv3.
>
>

---

From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2015 16:00:47 +0000

Hi Alissa, 

Thanks,
Acee