[pim] Re: pim WGLC for draft-ietf-pim-gaap-06

> Thanks Dino. Changes look good, just one thing.
> 
> 
> On Fri, Feb 13, 2026 at 2:12 PM Dino Farinacci <[email protected]> wrote:
> [...]
>> We have clarified that the Timestamp is a 32-bit standard epoch UTC timestamp in seconds per RFC 8536. We also added documentation that records may not be aligned and the Group Name field follows immediately after the Timestamp field.
> 
> You misunderstood what I wrote here. I think it is good to point out
> that a record starts right after the Group Name field of the previous
> record.

I'll fix this. I'll submit new rev tomorrow.

> For the address space section and reviews, should we maybe see if
> mboned has thoughts on the address space? Should we try to get some
> directorate reviews before requesting publication? Maybe routing area
> and int area makes sense?

That is fine by me. Mike, can you take care of this?

> Can you authors (and anyone else who might know) state whether you are
> aware of any IPR?
> 
> Thanks,
> Stig

No IPR I am aware of.

Dino


_______________________________________________
pim mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]