Subject: [Lsr] WGLC: draft-ietf-bier-bar-ipa

From: Greg Shepherd <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 13:16:44 -0700

cc:ing lsr for input before progress. We have good overlap, but too be
sure, the list.

The draft cleared WGLC:

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bier-bar-ipa-04

In discussion of next steps, the following comments were made by Alvaro
which need to be addressed:

<alvaro>
- In general, idnits and the IESG likes it very much when the specific
phrase “this document updates rfcxxx by…” appears in the Abstract and the
Introduction.  There’s some similar text there, but not exactly.   Just a
nit.

- There are no Security Considerations!!

- Use the rfc8174 template!

- "all routers SHOULD be provisioned with and signal the same BAR and IPA
values”. When would you not do that?  Why is that not a MUST?

- “...MUST treat the advertising BFR as incapable of supporting BIER for
the sub-domain.  How incapable routers are handled is outside the scope of
this document.”  That is a Normative contradiction?  How are routers
supposed to meet the MUST if they don’t know what to do?

- s/MUST also be clear/MUST also be specified
</alvaro>

Authors, please address these comments. Xiejingrong has volunteered to be
Document Shepherd, once cleared.

Thank you,
Shep
(chairs)