Subject: [Idr] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-idr-route-oscillation-stop-03: (with COMMENT)

From: "Stephen Farrell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 04 May 2016 00:51:09 -0700

Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-idr-route-oscillation-stop-03: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-route-oscillation-stop/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

- abstract: use of so many acronyms here is a pity, be good
to expand or not use some of 'em

- intro: "MED attribute" is not mentioned in RFC4271, at
least not obviously enough to find with a grep;-) I had to
search for "multi" to figure out that you meant the
MULTI_EXIT_DISC thing, so maybe point at 5.1.4 in 4271 to
be nice?

- intro: It'd also be nice to provide a reference for the
"almost all of the known" claim for readers who aren't
familiar with such examples. (And I do mean "nice" and not
"necessary":-)

---

From: "Alvaro Retana (aretana)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 4 May 2016 17:00:39 +0000

On 5/4/16, 3:51 AM, "Stephen Farrell" <[email-masked]> wrote:

[Author hat on.]

Stephen:

Hi!

Thanks for the review.  I'll address the comments in the next revision.

Alvaro.