Ballot for draft-ietf-bess-virtual-subnet
Yes
No Objection
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 05 and is now closed.
Thanks for addressing my concerns on ttl handling and loop.
Just a couple of editorial comments: - section 1, first paragraph, 2nd sentence: The sentence is confusing, and may suffer from an editing or copy-paste error. I'm not sure what "costly at the risk" of means. Also, who "generally admits" this to be true?
Jouni Korhonen performed the opsdir review.
Thank you for addressing the SecDir comments and expanding the Security considerations section.
I support Alia's Discuss. I see that there's proposed text to resolve that position. I will remain a No-Objection if that proposed text is adopted, but I would be more comfortable if the proposed text was more specific than "may not work properly" - is there anything else that can go wrong, besides unbounded looping?
Thanks for addressing the discuss by adding more text on protection of inter-DC traffic.