Subject: [manet] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-manet-dlep-pause-extension-07: (with COMMENT)

From: Alissa Cooper via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 May 2019 07:04:09 -0700

Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-manet-dlep-pause-extension-07: 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-manet-dlep-pause-extension/

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

DISCUSS cleared, leaving in my previous COMMENT:

I support the DISCUSS positions of Warren and Magnus.

I'm unclear on why this specification is necessary, i.e. why the use of
existing transport protocols and processing of DSCPs do not suffice to achieve
what this specification is aiming to achieve. Is that explained in another
document somewhere?

= Section 1 =

"Various flow control methods are possible, e.g.,
   see [I-D.ietf-manet-dlep-da-credit-extension]."

The referenced document does not specify a flow control method. Maybe
draft-ietf-manet-dlep-credit-flow-control is what was intended?