Skip to main content

MPLS Upstream Label Assignment and Context-Specific Label Space
RFC 5331

Yes

(David Ward)
(Ron Bonica)
(Ross Callon)

No Objection

(Chris Newman)
(Cullen Jennings)
(Jari Arkko)
(Jon Peterson)
(Lisa Dusseault)
(Magnus Westerlund)

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 07 and is now closed.

Lars Eggert (was Discuss) No Objection

Comment (2008-05-08)
I agree with Jari's and especially Lisa's DISCUSSes.

(David Ward; former steering group member) Yes

Yes ()

                            

(Ron Bonica; former steering group member) Yes

Yes ()

                            

(Ross Callon; former steering group member) Yes

Yes ()

                            

(Chris Newman; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()

                            

(Cullen Jennings; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()

                            

(Jari Arkko; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection

No Objection ()

                            

(Jon Peterson; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()

                            

(Lisa Dusseault; former steering group member) (was Discuss, No Objection) No Objection

No Objection ()

                            

(Magnus Westerlund; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()

                            

(Pasi Eronen; former steering group member) (was Discuss, No Objection) No Objection

No Objection (2008-05-07)
I agree with Jari's DISCUSS about handling IPv6.

Stephen Farrell's SecDir review identified a number of places
that were slightly difficult to understand, and could benefit
from some minor editorial changes.

It wouldn't hurt if the security considerations text contained
a pointer to draft-ietf-mpls-mpls-and-gmpls-security-framework.

(Russ Housley; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2008-05-07)
  Section 8 says:
  >
  > The procedure described below applies to LSRs using IPv4 and does
  > not apply to LSRs only using IPv6. A solution for IPv6 LSRs is
  > outside the scope of this document.
  >
  I hope this is a heads up that another document is coming.

(Tim Polk; former steering group member) (was No Record, Discuss, No Objection) No Objection

No Objection (2008-05-07)
[I know I'm beating a dead horse, but that is why it's a comment rather
than a discuss.]

While the document does not address procedures for distributing
upstream-assigned labels, there is a section (6) describing the
requirement to do so.  If there are known security considerations
that apply to this requirement it would be useful to say so in
the security considerations.  Inclusion by reference is fine, of course.