Subject: [Idr] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp-16: (with COMMENT)

From: Mirja Kühlewind <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2018 03:53:57 -0800

Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp-16: 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-te-pm-bgp/

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

I know that this doc is only pointing to [I-D.ietf-lsr-isis-rfc7810bis] and
[RFC7471] for the definition of the respective metrics, however, there are are
IPPM RFCs for each of these metrics that provide further insights on how the
calculate them correctly, e.g. rfc3393 IP Packet Delay Variation. I guess it
could have been good to provide pointers to these RFCs but it also seems that
this doc is the wrong doc of the set of three...