Domain Subobjects for the Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)
RFC 7897

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 09 and is now closed.

Deborah Brungard Yes

(Jari Arkko) No Objection

(Ben Campbell) No Objection

Alissa Cooper No Objection

(Spencer Dawkins) No Objection

Comment (2015-11-16 for -09)
No email
send info
In this text:

   The new subobjects introduced by this document will not be understood
   by a legacy implementation.  If one of the subobjects is received in
   a PCEP object that does not understand it, it will behave as
   described in Section 3.4.3.  
   
I think something is confused. Do PCEP objects understand subobjects? Or is this 

   The new subobjects introduced by this document will not be understood
   by legacy implementations.  If a legacy implementation receives one 
   of the subobjects that it does not understand in a PCEP object, the
   legacy implementation will behave as described in Section 3.4.3. 

correct?

(Stephen Farrell) No Objection

(Joel Jaeggli) No Objection

Barry Leiba No Objection

Comment (2015-11-18 for -09)
No email
send info
In Section 5.1, to be consistent with how IANA prefers registry URLs to be specified, please remove the string "/pcep.xhtml" from the three IANA URLs.

(Terry Manderson) No Objection

(Kathleen Moriarty) No Objection

Comment (2015-11-18 for -09)
No email
send info
Thank you for working out new text for the security considerations section from the SecDir review.  The new text is significantly better.

https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/secdir/current/msg06179.html

Alvaro Retana No Objection

(Martin Stiemerling) No Objection