Subject: [Idr] Robert Wilton's No Objection on draft-ietf-idr-tunnel-encaps-20: (with COMMENT)

From: Robert Wilton via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 09:35:06 -0800

Robert Wilton has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-idr-tunnel-encaps-20: 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-idr-tunnel-encaps/

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

Hi,

Thanks for this document.  I have no significant comments.

Like Martin, I'm also somewhat confused by this text "Because RFC 8365 depends
on RFC 5640, it is similarly obsoleted.", since it appears that RFC 8365 isn't
really being formally obsoleted.

>From a manageability perspective, are there any addition data nodes required to
the BGP YANG data model, or augmentations to that model?  If so, are these
being taken care of in another draft or subsumed into existing YANG modelling
work?

Regards,
Rob