The Locator/ID Separation Protocol Internet Groper (LIG)
RFC 6835

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 06 and is now closed.

(Jari Arkko) Yes

(Ron Bonica) (was Discuss) No Objection

Comment (2011-09-06)
No email
send info
1) The reference to LISP-LIG seems to be self-referential. 

2) The reference to draft-ietfr-lisp-alt-06 does not resolve

(Stewart Bryant) No Objection

(Gonzalo Camarillo) No Objection

(Ralph Droms) No Objection

Comment (2011-09-07 for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
No email
send info
Responding to Joel Halpern's question about Informational vs. Experimental:

I prefer Informational and would not object to Experimental.

(Wesley Eddy) No Objection

(Adrian Farrel) (was Discuss) No Objection

Comment (2011-09-08)
No email
send info
Section 1

s/IDS/IDs/

---                     

Section 2

s/an destination/a destination/

---

Section 3

   Verifying registration is called "ligging yourself".

Surely this is "groping yourself"?

---

Please add a note somewhere to explain to the reader of this document that the DB is public. I.e. be precise on the fact that the DB is the set of publicly available LISP resolvers.

---

Section 8

Please add a sentence stating that LIG can be misused hence the importance to protect LISP-MS and support security features.

(Stephen Farrell) No Objection

Comment (2011-09-05 for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
No email
send info
- I guess the definitions here aren't meant to be authoritative
if they conflicted with e.g. another of the WG's documents. It
might be no harm to just say that and point at the document 
that will have the authoritative definitions just in case.
(The UDP port number included here is what triggered this, I
guess there's an outside chance that might change for some 
reason as some other document progresses.)

- Some ascii-art would be helpful if the authors had the time
and energy, but that might be better in some other draft (or
maybe exists elsewhere).

- PTR is used but not defined.

- Is it right to say "EID address"? There're a couple of those.

typos:

s/an destination/a destination/
s/an a address block/address blocks/
s/usage cases/use cases/
s/each which/each of which/

(Russ Housley) No Objection

Comment (2011-09-03 for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
No email
send info
  Please consider the comments from the Gen-ART Review by Mary Barnes
  on 10-August-2011.  The review can be found at:
  http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/gen-art/current/msg06586.html.

(Pete Resnick) No Objection

(Dan Romascanu) (was Discuss) No Objection

Comment (2011-09-08)
No email
send info
I support Ron's DISCUSS item about the need for Normative References. The document cannot be read and understood without reading those.

(Peter Saint-Andre) No Objection

(Robert Sparks) No Objection

(Sean Turner) No Objection

Comment (2011-09-06 for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
No email
send info
s 10.2: r/draft-ietfr-lisp-alt/draft-ietf-lisp-alt