Note: This ballot was opened for revision 08 and is now closed.
Summary: Needs 6 more YES or NO OBJECTION positions to pass.
Having ploughed through the wdiff for the latest revision, and looking at the
email thread between Suresh and Les, I believe all of my Discuss issues have
been resolved. Thanks for the work.
- LR with two MAGs implies that MAG1 knows that MAG2 is the CN's
location at the granularity of the MAG (MAG2) with which the CN
is associated.. Since there is a way for a MAG to initiate this
then a bad or compromised MAG could attempt to track any CN
for which LR is enabled who's address the bad MAG knows. That
is a privacy problem for the CN's. I noted this about the DIME WG
equivalent draft and the authors of tha suggested that text as per
the above would be better in this document. I'm not sure there's
a mitigation here really but I'd say its worth noting at least.
- Figures 1 and 2 have no real caption and aren't referred to
from the text so are less useful than they could be.
I've cleared my Discuss position and thanks for reconciling my concerns.
4. In section 4.1, does "LR state of the MAG" refer to the state in the
LMA? Also, is pMAG == MAG?
6. In section 10.1, "for now" is unnecessary. Why is the alignment
requirement mentioned here and not for the definitions in section 9?