Subject: [mpls] Eric Rescorla's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mrt-06: (with COMMENT)

From: Eric Rescorla <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2017 11:07:09 -0700

Eric Rescorla has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mrt-06: 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-ldp-mrt/

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

Line 106
   familiar with the architecture in [RFC7812] to understand how and why
   the LDP extensions for behavior are needed.

It would actually be helpful to explain this here.

Line 430
   However, should this situation occur, the expected behavior of an LSR
   receiving these conflicting advertisements is defined as foll If an
   LSR receives a label mapping advertisement for a rainbow FEC from an

Nit: as follows.