Subject: Re: [Teas] Suresh Krishnan's No Objection on draft-ietf-teas-lsp-diversity-08: (with COMMENT)

From: Dieter Beller <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2017 11:59:42 +0100

Hi Suresh,

my apologies for the late response - it was difficult for me finding
time in the last weeks to address the IESG review comments.

Please find inline below how we suggest to address your
comment.

Could you please let us know whether your comment is adequately
addressed.

Thanks,

Dieter and co-authors

On 31.08.2017 06:00, Suresh Krishnan
wrote:

Suresh Krishnan has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-teas-lsp-diversity-08: 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-teas-lsp-diversity/

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

* Section 2.1
Is there a separate diversity identifier type called "IPv6 Client Initiated
Identifier" as referenced in the following text

"When the diversity identifier type is set to "IPv6 Client Initiated
Identifier""

If there isn't such a DI Type, can you please fix this text.

Good catch! Fixed as follows:

When the diversity identifier type is set to "Client

Initiated Identifier" in the IPv6 Diversity XRO subobject,

the diversity identifier value MUST be encoded as follows: