Subject: Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-bfd-seamless-ip-04: (with COMMENT)

From: "Spencer Dawkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 03 May 2016 19:44:29 -0700

Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-bfd-seamless-ip-04: 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 https://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:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bfd-seamless-ip/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Just a couple of small things.

I'm pretty sure I know why 

      *  UDP destination port MUST be set to a well-known UDP
         destination port assigned for S-BFD: 7784.

      *  UDP source port MUST NOT be set to 7784.
      
the UDP source port has this restriction, but it might be helpful to
people who can't guess, if you could add a phrase explaining why. We were
all new protocol designers once.
      
It's a small thing, but 

       BFD Chairs <[email-masked]>
       
we're phasing out @tools.ietf.org in favor of @ietf.org, aren't we?