Subject: [Pals] Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-pe-etree-10: (with COMMENT)

From: "Barry Leiba" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 02 Dec 2015 19:55:14 -0800

Barry Leiba has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-pe-etree-10: 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-l2vpn-vpls-pe-etree/

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

I agree with Ben and Álvaro about the use of 2119 key words to talk about
something that's normatively specified in a MEF document and not here.

Why does the first paragraph of the Introduction specifically mention MEF
6.1, with no reference provided?  There is a reference to MEF 6.2 (but
it's not cited here).  Is something out of sync?  And if so, why is there
no citation in the Introduction?

The MEF documents are cited in the Terminology section (with an incorrect
citation to MEF6.1, which isn't in the references).  That tells me that
they should be normative references, as they're providing definitions of
terminology that has to be understood... but you have them as informative
references.  Why?  (This comment is very close to a DISCUSS, but I'm not
balloting it that way.)

---

From: Jiangyuanlong <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 06:42:14 +0000

Hi Barry,

1. Yes, they are out of sync, and all the references to MEF 6.1 will be updated to MEF 6.2.
2. idnits used to throw out warnings if non-IETF standard track RFCs were listed in the normative reference section, that was the main reason we moved them in the informative reference section.
We can move both IEEE 802.1Q-2014 and MEF 6.2 to the normative references (it seems the newest version of idnits acknowledges them).

Thanks,
Yuanlong