Non-Penultimate Hop Popping Behavior and Out-of-Band Mapping for RSVP-TE Label Switched Paths
RFC 6511

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 09 and is now closed.

(Stewart Bryant) Yes

(Adrian Farrel) Yes

(Ron Bonica) No Objection

(Wesley Eddy) No Objection

(Stephen Farrell) No Objection

Comment (2011-08-22)
No email
send info
RRO is used a couple of times before being expanded

The secdir reviewer asked a question [1] to which I didn't
see an answer but it doesn't look like it warrants a
discuss. 

  [1] http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/secdir/current/msg02855.html

(David Harrington) No Objection

Comment (2011-08-23)
No email
send info
1) The abstract contains the RFC2119 conventions text, including references. This should be in the main body of the text, not the abstract.

2) in 2.4, I think the text could be clearer that the notify message only supplements the path error. It is not used INSTEAD of the path error message.

3) IANA is requested to assign a new error subcode, but the text (2.4) never mentions the use of the IANA-assigned value. 

(Russ Housley) No Objection

(Pete Resnick) No Objection

(Dan Romascanu) No Objection

(Peter Saint-Andre) No Objection

(Robert Sparks) No Objection

(Sean Turner) No Objection

Comment (2011-08-23)
No email
send info
<an absolute nit>

The RFC editor might do this for you but I can't remember: to avoid a trivial errata (and yes we get these) please consider re-ordering the RFC references numbers to be lowest # to highest #.

</an absolute nit>