Skip to main content

Multicast Source Discovery Protocol (MSDP) Deployment Scenarios
draft-ietf-mboned-msdp-deploy-06

Yes

(David Kessens)
(Randy Bush)

No Objection

(Allison Mankin)
(Bert Wijnen)
(Harald Alvestrand)
(Margaret Cullen)
(Ned Freed)
(Scott Hollenbeck)
(Steven Bellovin)
(Ted Hardie)

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 06 and is now closed.

(Bill Fenner; former steering group member) (was Discuss) Yes

Yes (2003-10-16)
I resolved my DISCUSS (below) with the promise that it'd get fixed in AUTH48.

I think the words "Multicast (ASM) service" are accidentally duplicated at the beginning of the 2nd to last paragraph on page 3 (or I don't understand what the document is trying to say).  Other than that I'm a Yes.

(David Kessens; former steering group member) Yes

Yes ()

                            

(Randy Bush; former steering group member) Yes

Yes ()

                            

(Alex Zinin; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2004-07-07)
Gen-art reviewer Scott Brim:

There are a couple tiny
things that RFC Editor can clean up, and a couple issues on text
clarity, but nothing I can object to.  The "clarity" issues are just as
much my problem as the draft's.  This is deployment scenarios, not a
protocol spec, and if you have enough understanding of the protocol to
want to deploy it, you will very probably have no problems with text
clarity.  

- Idnits says it's a little off on rfc2026/3667/3668 conformance.  

- I'm wholeheartedly in favor of the Normative Reference variance for
  MSDP, and leaving MSDP experimental.

(Allison Mankin; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()

                            

(Bert Wijnen; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()

                            

(Harald Alvestrand; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()

                            

(Jon Peterson; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2003-10-16)
Nit, IANA Considerations: "creates a no new requirements"

(Margaret Cullen; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()

                            

(Ned Freed; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2003-10-16)

                            

(Russ Housley; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2003-10-14)
The RFC 2119 boilerplate needs to be moved from the Status of this Document into the body of the document.
  
Please place the Acknowledgements section after the IANA Considerations section.
  
In section 6.2: s/SHOULD BE be/SHOULD be/

(Scott Hollenbeck; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()

                            

(Steven Bellovin; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()

                            

(Ted Hardie; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()

                            

(Thomas Narten; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection

No Objection (2003-10-16)
normative ref to ssm architecture, "ID Exists"  state.
normative ref to mcast-unsuable, "ID Exists"  state.
Are these documents close to being done?