LDP Extensions for Hub and Spoke Multipoint Label Switched Path
RFC 7140

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 05 and is now closed.

(Stewart Bryant) Yes

(Adrian Farrel) Yes

(Jari Arkko) No Objection

(Richard Barnes) No Objection

Comment (2013-12-17 for -05)
No email
send info
I think I grok what this thing is doing at a high level.  But the name "hub and spoke multipoint" seems inapt, since there's not actually a hub and spoke topology required, just a reverse path from leaves to root.  Wouldn't something like "P2MP with Upstream Path (PUP)" be more accurate?

The acronym "FEC" is never expanded, and might cause confusion for readers who like error correction.

(Benoît Claise) No Objection

(Spencer Dawkins) No Objection

(Stephen Farrell) No Objection

Comment (2013-12-18 for -05)
No email
send info

- What a file name, I bet it'd sound funny if someone
tries to pronounce it:-)

(Brian Haberman) No Objection

Comment (2013-12-17 for -05)
No email
send info
I am balloting No-Obj based on a quick scan of the document showing no impact on the Internet Area protocols and trust in the RTG ADs doing the right thing.

(Joel Jaeggli) No Objection

Barry Leiba No Objection

(Martin Stiemerling) No Objection

(Sean Turner) No Objection

Comment (2013-12-18 for -05)
No email
send info
Like Brian, I skimmed it, didn't see any security issues, and am trusting the RTG ADs to do the right thing.