Thanks Francesca. We have just posted the updated version of the document : https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy-17
On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 5:13 AM Francesca Palombini < francesca.palomb...@ericsson.com> wrote: > Cullen: thank you for this review – I agree with you and have balloted No > Objection. Authors: thank you for addressing Cullen’s comment in the next > revision of the draft. > > > > Francesca > > > > *From: *art <art-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of Ketan Talaulikar < > ketant.i...@gmail.com> > *Date: *Friday, 11 February 2022 at 07:17 > *To: *Cullen Jennings <flu...@iii.ca> > *Cc: *draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy....@ietf.org < > draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy....@ietf.org>, a...@ietf.org < > a...@ietf.org>, SPRING WG <spring@ietf.org>, last-c...@ietf.org < > last-c...@ietf.org> > *Subject: *Re: [art] Artart last call review of > draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy-16 > > Hi Cullen, > > > > Thanks for your review. > > > > We will include the range 0x20-0x7E in the spec and this was also what > Benjamin Kaduk had suggested. We will incorporate this in the next version > of the document. > > > > Thanks, > > Ketan > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 7, 2022 at 3:10 AM Cullen Jennings via Datatracker < > nore...@ietf.org> wrote: > > Reviewer: Cullen Jennings > Review result: Ready > > This draft does not raise any issues specific to the ART area. > > The use of non UTF symbolic names is appropriate for this use case so I do > not > see any issues with strings. I view printable ascii as fairly well defined > but > if you want to be clearer, you could say 0x20 to 0x7E. > > As an outside reader not involved with the spring WG, this draft was > relatively > easy to understand. I do not see any problems with publication. > > >
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
