Multi-Chassis Passive Optical Network (MC-PON) Protection in MPLS
draft-ietf-pals-mc-pon-05
Yes
(Deborah Brungard)
No Objection
(Alia Atlas)
(Alvaro Retana)
(Ben Campbell)
(Benoît Claise)
(Jari Arkko)
(Joel Jaeggli)
(Mirja Kühlewind)
(Suresh Krishnan)
(Terry Manderson)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 04 and is now closed.
Deborah Brungard Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
(for -04)
Unknown
Alexey Melnikov Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
(2016-09-28)
Unknown
Thank you for addressing my DISCUSS.
Alia Atlas Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -04)
Unknown
Alvaro Retana Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -04)
Unknown
Ben Campbell Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -04)
Unknown
Benoît Claise Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -04)
Unknown
Jari Arkko Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -04)
Unknown
Joel Jaeggli Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -04)
Unknown
Kathleen Moriarty Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2016-09-14 for -04)
Unknown
I agree with Stephen's discuss and the SecDir reviewer.
Mirja Kühlewind Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -04)
Unknown
Spencer Dawkins Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2016-09-14 for -04)
Unknown
I was surprised by this text in the Abstract, MPLS is being deployed deeper into operator networks, often to or past the access network node. because I don't think what this is saying, matches text like this in the Introduction, Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) is being extended to the edge of operator networks, as is described in the the Multi-Segment Pseudowires with Passive Optical Network (PON) access use case [RFC6456]. Is it "to the edge", or "past the access network node"? But if there's no reason to use a different description, you might consider using the same description in both places. Of course, you folks are the experts on how MPLS is deployed ... and maybe I'm just confused by which direction you mean when you say "deeper"! I am also interested in resolution of Stephen's Discuss.
Stephen Farrell Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
(2016-09-27 for -04)
Unknown
Thanks for resolving my discuss. (See the email thread for details.)
Suresh Krishnan Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -04)
Unknown
Terry Manderson Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -04)
Unknown