Subject: [Lsr] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv2-hbit-11: (with COMMENT)

From: Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2019 04:31:48 -0800

Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv2-hbit-11: 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-ospf-ospfv2-hbit/

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

Thank you for the work put into this document. The short document is easy to
read even if I wonder whether it is useful to spend time on IPv4-only protocol
;-)

The deployment issue (section 5) had raised a DISCUSS of mine and I appreciated
your reply, so, I have cleared this DISCUSS.

Feel free to ignore my COMMENTs and NIT.

== COMMENTS ==

-- Generic --
Mentioning that the H-bit of OSPFv2 is the reverse of the R-bit of OSPFv3 would
be useful.

-- Section 1 --
A description of "Closet Switches" would be welcome.

-- Section 3 --
Isn't the wording "host router" an oxymoron ?

== NITS ==

-- Section 8 --
I recommend reading and following the suggestions of RFC 8126 (how to write the
IANA considerations)