Subject: [spring] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-mpls-19: (with COMMENT)

From: Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 07:44:18 -0700

Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-mpls-19: 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-spring-segment-routing-mpls/

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

It is time to publish this one.

Nits
----

In section 2, "The flooding mechanisms of link state IGPs fits very well with
label stacking on ingress" while I do not disagree with the statement, it is
somehow out of the blue: either explain shortly why or delete the sentence if
so obvious. Note: or even keep it like it is now.

Section 2.5.1, binary numbers 100 and 110 should probably explicitly qualified
as binary representations.

Some typos in name or spacing in sections 6 and 7