IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [babel] I-D Action: draft-ietf-babel-v4viav6-00.txt

Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@toke.dk> Thu, 08 April 2021 14:21 UTC

Return-Path: <toke@toke.dk>
X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A9A33A19BE; Thu, 8 Apr 2021 07:21:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=toke.dk
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MvouAfFt66U6; Thu, 8 Apr 2021 07:21:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [IPv6:2a0c:4d80:42:2001::664]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A59E3A19A9; Thu, 8 Apr 2021 07:21:44 -0700 (PDT)
From: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@toke.dk>
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1617891690; bh=eS8Dtij9fb2JK+MX2hrv8LNyQCjHbdn0UcVVPkgQ8VM=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=P1xvBGD3OabnQ4KXs8gpVgoJZvGC2Fsi5oo7lU50l92ivGY0YbzfCr0CGW0zqTDlD I1pqgTIPhsE0fjus8C+RsV0YsbWdYz798qsH8r3RrTbqKr98VsYikdhK/QtKW/8XSd sRKERAKatp+9B9X6mYfMUAxgbkWAO7ZW2aq0Z2IgXy4AonPr5O5B54baGz0tyMePrz sLK0RQqDT+UnPsji1bNLYq18WgHpCbC/o4B8JXjyglt7iFJ0VuI6wWb0lMVyR4FADH NWGm+cJMrUngaKO2lkRD6HwhlPWIcIVQ0t2OBNp1vt/N8sY4mALLFMrUcElXi9rnY0 6b3kDY01RbWpA==
To: Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@irif.fr>, Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
Cc: babel-chairs <babel-chairs@ietf.org>, Babel at IETF <babel@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <87eeflm0do.wl-jch@irif.fr>
References: <160321741182.20077.1775706618101177377@ietfa.amsl.com> <42028b97-c2ff-6a25-e8ac-c77129caac73@ens.fr> <CAF4+nEFF8a_p7Ngskmej9ZtbzGHCFrHKh6Gm17vb0SfwPNO=LA@mail.gmail.com> <87eeflm0do.wl-jch@irif.fr>
Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2021 16:21:29 +0200
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
Message-ID: <87mtu8zwk6.fsf@toke.dk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/babel/tihv1oks7YFmkS1VTBOL3ZguEoY>
Subject: Re: [babel] I-D Action: draft-ietf-babel-v4viav6-00.txt
X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
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: Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:21:58 -0000

Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@irif.fr> writes:

>> There is one other question in my mind. Does this draft really need to
>> be Experimental? I would be inclined to target it to Proposed Standard.
>
> I'm a little uneasy on this subject.  My personal feeling is that we
> haven't done our homework on this extension (admittedly my fault), and
> that we don't have enough implementation and deployment experience to
> propose it as a standard right now.
>
> I'd be delighted if people could disagree.

Isn't that just a matter of time? I.e., we could adopt it as PS, with
the expectation that by the time it gets published we will have built
that experience? Or does there even need to be a final decision about
the status at adoption time?

-Toke

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email