Skip to main content

Dynamic Placement of Multi-Segment Pseudowires
RFC 7267

Yes

(Stewart Bryant)

No Objection

(Barry Leiba)
(Benoît Claise)
(Brian Haberman)
(Gonzalo Camarillo)
(Jari Arkko)
(Martin Stiemerling)
(Pete Resnick)
(Spencer Dawkins)

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 20 and is now closed.

(Adrian Farrel; former steering group member) (was Discuss) Yes

Yes (2014-03-09 for -21)
Many thanks for addressing my Discuss and mopping up the many Comments.

I support the publication of this document and have just three small Comments remaining.

---

After updates to Figure 1, the text continues to refer to "PSN1" and "PSN2". I think you can...

OLD
   A PSN tunnel extends
   from T-PE1 to S-PE1 Switching PE1 (S-PE1) across PSN1, and a second PSN
   tunnel extends from S-PE1 to T-PE2 across PSN2.
NEW
   A PSN tunnel extends
   from T-PE1 to S-PE1 Switching PE1 (S-PE1), and a second PSN tunnel 
   extends from S-PE1 to T-PE2.
END

and later

OLD
   PSN tunnels (e.g., PSN1 and PSN2)
NEW
   PSN tunnels
END

----

> >You will fall foul of the RFC Editor's requirement that the section
> >titled "Authors' Addresses" contains only those people named on the
> >front page. The others will need to be moved to "Contributors".

You are still going to have to do something more here. Either now or during the
RFC Editor process.

(Stewart Bryant; former steering group member) Yes

Yes (for -20)

                            

(Barry Leiba; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -20)

                            

(Benoît Claise; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -20)

                            

(Brian Haberman; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -20)

                            

(Gonzalo Camarillo; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -20)

                            

(Jari Arkko; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -20)

                            

(Joel Jaeggli; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection

No Objection (2014-03-10 for -21)
WFM. 

was

Support Adrian's discuss.

Also awaiting proposed text to address the security area review concerns.

(Martin Stiemerling; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -20)

                            

(Pete Resnick; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -20)

                            

(Sean Turner; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2014-01-09 for -20)
Support Joel's discuss.

(Spencer Dawkins; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -20)

                            

(Stephen Farrell; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2014-01-08 for -20)

- As noted in Joel's discuss, the authors promised some
text to address the secdir review but I've not seen that
so far (only been a couple of days to be fair). And as
it happens that review didn't say why the reviewer had
been convinced that its ok, so I'll look forward to
seeing Joel's discuss being resolved.

   [1] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/secdir/current/msg04501.html