Label Advertisement Discipline for LDP Forwarding Equivalence Classes (FECs)

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 03 and is now closed.

(Alia Atlas) Yes

(Adrian Farrel) Yes

(Jari Arkko) No Objection

(Richard Barnes) No Objection

(Benoît Claise) No Objection

Comment (2014-04-22)
No email
send info
  This document updates [RFC5036] to make that fact clear, as well as 
  updates [RFC3212], [RFC4447], [RFC5918], [RFC6388], and [RFC7140] to 

Hopefully, the RFC editor will expand those RFCs into their respective titles, to improve readability.
Sorry, I don't know by heart the LDP-related RFC numbers :-)

Note: no need to reply to this comment.

(Alissa Cooper) No Objection

(Spencer Dawkins) No Objection

(Stephen Farrell) No Objection

(Brian Haberman) No Objection

(Joel Jaeggli) No Objection

(Barry Leiba) No Objection

(Ted Lemon) No Objection

Comment (2014-04-23)
No email
send info
FEC should be expanded on first use.   Otherwise, this document looks fine to my untrained eye.  :)

(Kathleen Moriarty) No Objection

(Pete Resnick) No Objection

(Martin Stiemerling) No Objection