Subject: [manet] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-multitopology-07: (with COMMENT)

From: "Benoit Claise" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2015 00:44:19 -0700

Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-multitopology-07: 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-manet-olsrv2-multitopology/

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

Thanks for addressing my DISCUSS and Sue's points.

Editorial comments:

Section 12

"If the MANET may contain non-MT-OLSRv2 routers,"
This is weird sentence.

The next bullet point contains a similar sentence which I believe is more
appropriate: 
"Note that if there is any possibility that there are any routers not
implementing MT-OLSRv2"

The following sentence could also be improved (may or may not)
      "If a packet is created for a destination that is not part of the
      corresponding topology then it may or may not be delivered (if the
      originating router is a non-MT-OLSRv2 router) or will not be
      transmitted (if the originating router is an MT-OLSRv2 router).
      Routers SHOULD be managed so that this does not occur."

Regards, Benoit