Hi,
I support adoption. Please find some non-blocking comments that authors can
work on.
# Minor
- Should you call out RFC 8986 Network programming in the Introduction?
- Section 2, it gives the impression that the control and management plane
are not in scope but we do have section 6.4. Update
Hi Alvaro, Bruno, Joel, WG, and authors,
I support the adoption call.
However, I believe the document should be “informational.”
I have a comment on the section 7.1.1:
The Section is not specific to SRv6 compression (CSID draft).
RFC 8754 and RFC 8986 define reduced SRH, i.e., SRH MAY be omitted
On August 19, 2024 at 1:03:58 PM, Zafar Ali wrote:
Zafar:
Hi!
> I support the adoption call.
>
> However, I believe the document should be “informational.”
Do you have a specific reason?
The intended status should depend on the content and its relationship
to other documents. It is too earl
Hi Alvaro,
The current text is better aligned with the informational status.
If needed, the status can be changed to Standards Track (or BCP) during the WG
progression of the document.
Thanks
Regards … Zafar
From: Alvaro Retana
Date: Monday, August 19, 2024 at 1:13 PM
To: Zafar Ali (zali)
Cc
