Subject: [mpls] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-lsp-ping-04: (with COMMENT)

From: "Mirja Kuehlewind" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 12:27:28 -0700

Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-lsp-ping-04: 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-mpls-entropy-lsp-ping/

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

As Scott mentioned in his review, I also think that the following
sentence needs more discussion:

"All LSRs along the LSP need to be able to understand the new flags
   and the new multipath information type."

How can you ever know if this is true? Isn't the whole problem that you
don't know what different LSRs implement?