Hi Peter,
Back in April we indeed did not sent you a specific feedback.
Reason is that we received several comments/reviews and batched everything in a
new I-D, with sending specific feedback to all.
Yet, if you are unsatisfied on how we addressed the issues we certainly need to
do more work.
Give me some time to go again thoroughly through your first review and I’ll get
back to you with a specific feedback.
Thanks for your time spent on this document.
ciao
L.
On 06 Feb 2016, at 04:39, Peter Yee <peter(_at_)akayla(_dot_)com> wrote:
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review
Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for
the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just like any other last call
comment. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>
Document: draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-06
Reviewer: Peter Yee
Review Date: February 5, 2016
IETF LC End Date: February 5, 2016
IESG Telechat date: February 18, 2016
Summary: This draft has serious issues, described in the review, and needs
to be rethought. [Not ready]
The draft attempts to specify the framework for the management of
experimental LISP EID sub-prefixes, but really could use some additional
work to flesh out the management aspects that are left unsaid.
This draft fixes only two minor nits I raised in my review of the -04
version. Nothing else has been addressed, nor have I received any feedback
on that review. In light of this, I have little new to add. It is possible
that the agreement between the IANA and the RIPE NCC will alleviate the
major concern I had with the draft, but not being privy to that agreement, I
can't make that determination.
My original review with the unaddressed comments can be found here:
https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/gen-art/current/msg11620.html