I read through the latest document and I am good with the updated document.

Thanks
Santosh P K

On Thu, May 8, 2025 at 2:32 AM Alice Russo <aru...@staff.rfc-editor.org>
wrote:

> Greg,
>
> Thank you for your reply. This document has been updated accordingly and
> will be published with RFC-to-be 9780 (when approvals of both documents are
> complete).
>
> This diff file shows only the changes since the last posted version
> (please refresh):
>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9772-lastrfcdiff.html
>
> The URLs are the same as below.
>
> RFC Editor/ar
>
> > On May 6, 2025, at 1:29 PM, Greg Mirsky <gregimir...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Alice,
> > thank you for your question. I think that the appropriate level of
> reference to draft-ietf-mpls-p2mp-bfd is normative.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Greg
> >
> > On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 1:23 PM Alice Russo <aru...@staff.rfc-editor.org>
> wrote:
> > David and coauthors,
> >
> > Thank you for your reply, David; your information has been updated as
> requested. A reference question:
> >
> > Should draft-ietf-mpls-p2mp-bfd be a normative reference because of the
> "MUST" in the "For IPv6" sentence in Section 2.3 (pasted below)? We note
> that draft is currently in AUTH48 state as RFC-to-be 9870. If you make the
> reference normative, then this document will refer to it by RFC number, and
> they will be published at the same time.
> >
> >    Inner IP header:
> >       Destination IP:  The IP address MUST be set to the loopback
> >          address 127.0.0.1/32 for IPv4 version.  For IPv6, the address
> >          MUST be selected from the Dummy IPv6 Prefix 100:0:0:1::/64
> >          [P2MP-BFD].
> >
> > For background, "Normative references specify documents that must be
> read to understand or implement the technology in the new RFC, or whose
> technology must be present for the technology in the new RFC to work." --
> quoting the IESG statement (
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/statement-iesg-iesg-statement-normative-and-informative-references-20060419/
> ).
> >
> >
> > Re: David's updates
> >
> > The revised files are here (please refresh):
> >   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9772.html
> >   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9772.txt
> >   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9772.pdf
> >   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9772.xml
> >
> > This diff file shows all changes from the approved I-D:
> >   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9772-diff.html
> >   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9772-rfcdiff.html (side by side)
> >
> > This diff file shows only the changes since the last posted version:
> >   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9772-lastrfcdiff.html
> >
> > Re:
> > > With those changes, I approve the resulting document.
> >
> > We have recorded your approval. This page shows the AUTH48 status
> > of your document:
> >   https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9772
> >
> > Thank you.
> > RFC Editor/ar
>
-- 
auth48archive mailing list -- auth48archive@rfc-editor.org
To unsubscribe send an email to auth48archive-le...@rfc-editor.org

Reply via email to