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

Hi all,

No IPR.
I'll check with mboned about address space.
Directorate reviews are reasonable.

thanks,
mike

On Sat, Feb 14, 2026 at 2:36 PM Dino Farinacci <[email protected]> wrote:

> > 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]