[rtgwg] Re: John Scudder's No Objection on draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa-21: (with COMMENT)

Hi John, Thank you for the review and working with the authors to get the issue resolved. Really appreciate it. Authors, Thanks for working on this document. Considering so many changes have been made during the IESG reviews, also suggested by the responsible AD, I will send an email to the list

[rtgwg] Final poll/review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa

Hi all, Thanks to everyone who contributed to this document. Now we're one step closer to having it published. The draft has now passed the IESG Ballot: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa/ However, considering all the discussion and changes during the IESG re

[rtgwg] Re: WG adoption call for draft-zhang-rtgwg-ipv6-address-resolution-yang (02/10/25-02/25/25)

Hi Acee, I agree that 'ietf-nd' does not seem appropriate for this YANG model and should be changed. However, 'ietf-nd-arp' could be confusing since ARP is for IPv4. How about 'ietf-ipv6-address-resolution' ? Thanks, Fan On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 11:05 PM Acee Lindem wrote: > > Hi Fan, > > Ok -