Source-Specific Protocol Independent Multicast in 232/8
RFC 4608
Yes
No Objection
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 09 and is now closed.
(Bert Wijnen; former steering group member) Yes
(Bill Fenner; former steering group member) Yes
(David Kessens; former steering group member) Yes
(Alex Zinin; former steering group member) No Objection
Draft: draft-ietf-mboned-ssm232-08 Reviewer: Brian Carpenter Date: 5 July 2004 I believe this is ready for BCP, and is necessary for operational reasons. I didn't see any issues with the text. I think the requested variance is justified. This is a case where pragmatism should win. (One could argue that MSDP is a de facto standard and would be more logically classified as Informational, but that is another thread...)
(Allison Mankin; former steering group member) No Objection
(Jon Peterson; former steering group member) No Objection
It might be nice to expand MSDP the first time it is used (at the end of Section 1).
(Margaret Cullen; former steering group member) No Objection
(Ned Freed; former steering group member) No Objection
(Russ Housley; former steering group member) No Objection
(Scott Hollenbeck; former steering group member) No Objection
(Steven Bellovin; former steering group member) No Objection
(Ted Hardie; former steering group member) No Objection
(Thomas Narten; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection
> SHOULD support source-only trees only, precluding the requirement of do we need 2119 words in the first paragraph of the introduction?