[babel] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-ietf-babel-information-model-11: (with COMMENT)
Alvaro Retana via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Tue, 03 November 2020 21:41 UTC
Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: babel@ietf.org
Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CD1B3A120A; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 13:41:57 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Alvaro Retana via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-babel-information-model@ietf.org, babel-chairs@ietf.org, babel@ietf.org, Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.21.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <160443971755.21752.8598533003327960774@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2020 13:41:57 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/babel/NNS7OfzJQF8DR4XxATi6-5F24hA>
Subject: [babel] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-ietf-babel-information-model-11: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." <babel.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/babel>, <mailto:babel-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/babel/>
List-Post: <mailto:babel@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:babel-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel>, <mailto:babel-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2020 21:42:00 -0000
Alvaro Retana has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-babel-information-model-11: 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-babel-information-model/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I want to revisit the question about including support for source-specific routing in the Information model. This topic came up already, but the discussion focused only on whether source-specific routing needed to be enabled or not, with one implementor mentioning that their implementation required it [1]. In addition to enabling the functionality, and because "most of the information model is focused on reporting Babel protocol operational state" (§1), I am interested in the reporting side. It seems to me that the incremental cost to add this support is trivial (as described in §3/draft-ietf-babel-source-specific: "Data Structures"). Why is source-specific routing not supported? I find it to be a significant omission, especially considering that the source-specific routing spec is in IESG Evaluation at the same time. [1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/babel/F7tlCQk8IeTaHN_rKHbsoKF3urE/
- [babel] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-iet… Alvaro Retana via Datatracker