RE: [Gen-art] gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mpls-mldp-hsmp-04

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Jari, Roni,
Thank you very much for the comments. Is it OK for you to change as below:
Section 3.1, "If the peer has not advertised the corresponding capability, then label messages using the HSMP FEC Element SHOULD NOT (as described in [RFC6388] section 2.1) be sent to the peer."
It is better to have the same description with RFC6388 here, so as to avoid any confusion.

Regards
Lizhong


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jari Arkko [mailto:jari.arkko@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2013 10:40 PM
> To: Roni Even
> Cc: 'Lizhong Jin'; draft-ietf-mpls-mldp-hsmp.all@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> ietf@xxxxxxxx; gen-art@xxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [Gen-art] gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mpls-mldp-hsmp-
> 04
> 
> Roni, Lizhong,
> 
> Thank you very much Roni for your review. And Lizhong for the updates.
> 
> (By the way, I saw no change regarding 3.1; I do agree with Roni that
> adding some explanation might be useful. This is just a comment,
> however - I will let you decide how to deal with it.)
> 
> Jari







[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]