Re: [babel] Adding two babel milestones

Donald Eastlake <> Tue, 25 May 2021 18:25 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CB9E3A187D for <>; Tue, 25 May 2021 11:25:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.848
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.848 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, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Kbv4iz9QUhFm for <>; Tue, 25 May 2021 11:24:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d2b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 75D833A187A for <>; Tue, 25 May 2021 11:24:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id a8so24497263ioa.12 for <>; Tue, 25 May 2021 11:24:57 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Brygt4l9d1iGjQPyZRWJpMA1TPf0iCSLb1rMOC87Dn0=; b=DWVeDiWQSOp/IahtbUB2BFTi+3zHvUH4m0lHSAhbDcnmRsQf++JuiKwcnjbmSmsPf7 GFUZcovxljjtWBH5MOZ3y1NPKoFpayYzj98CyRu9lGEGko8r81YXtsYPMU2RcOBnC2wg rpQENRnvMyyKDWwbIooz8O/BWgZgM1yBTa2o9c65bd/f8nxnI3rIJWChwu/23McJfreg 32ZEjqGU2wP4QUdhnSV8C8ac6fNEWSdbHKIKbifQ/K0U4g2uX3XSlM+8uPBEDzZOKYQB fIkgkiDNFMXYLbWcU0s2M14CayvgrAp4vA+8OKtTNU1S0gLrRNhObZwsV8cXQLorQuPI PZ3w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Brygt4l9d1iGjQPyZRWJpMA1TPf0iCSLb1rMOC87Dn0=; b=MF4jlxKbQ/GLnMtOSTdSXCqaJZhzTaybECFs1anV8+BZJ9FWz42LnY4GiBe45MAnYE n+19cJuT6q02+cvIurfFfMyS3pLIvfPN+XsWsinlbWUXIiYl6b6ZfekYaE50JgeYQVSu YxBdfqWTIR1GJDdXDAMwB7u5HnLaznjMHtY+4p32ZhJA90e6bf4uiyQU+3QBT+rNhxw+ NKUpmhFpQQzNq1Qrl+yePRPdPfWRcppw8DnbPnKDLQmzQFEnejGqO6msvkQ8b6Dzw4gz //3blRCJ4OVHUR3kZbz5cpx8nhSaBRhyxL+IfHMeidmMpTaVToa2J94n65n1RqEHdqQZ wiMQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532mVWEuD+zQz/zT3da8a7YH+pdXG/Zz31cTLHPluoaQ1D6eXBMc LGrnyd/zRHz7AVltxNkItSixNUku/Wng8M+Khkk=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzzFJSniLSagdxl0wXY8ElcStceZ4fS5EfaJ7D891a2fcFmt24mgSeEGJc8DqhvQWn6fGr02VbRHDlsGbstGY4=
X-Received: by 2002:a02:5409:: with SMTP id t9mr32848064jaa.50.1621967096190; Tue, 25 May 2021 11:24:56 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Donald Eastlake <>
Date: Tue, 25 May 2021 14:24:45 -0400
Message-ID: <>
To: Juliusz Chroboczek <>
Cc: Babel at IETF <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [babel] Adding two babel milestones
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 May 2021 18:25:02 -0000

Hi Juliusz,

On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 11:03 AM Juliusz Chroboczek <> wrote:
> Hi Donald,
> > So, I plan to add the following two milestones (I believe new milestones need
> > to be OKed by our AD):
> >
> >   June 2021   IESG submission of IPv4 via IPv6.
> Donald, I'd like to expand the introduction to this document before it is
> submitted to the IESG -- no content changes, just wording.  Is it possible
> to do that without restarting last call?

Probably. The Introduction does not seem to be controversial. I
suggested a change to the Introduction here
and there were no complaints. You could propose a different change to
the Introduction as a resolution to my comment. Since all this is
getting posted to the WG mailing list, if no one speaks up in 7 or 8
days and there are no technical changes to the protocol, I don't think
we would need a new WG Last Call.

> >   Sept 2021   WG adoption of a Babel multicast draft.
> What do you envision?

Multicast is mentioned in the Babel WG Charter as something optional
to work on. This is just my personal opinion but a routing system that
doesn't handle both unicast and multicast seems incomplete to me.

> Babeld works with PIM-SM (that's what the
> "reflect-kernel-metric" option is for), but I'm not seeing a lot of
> interest.

Is this discussed in any of the Babel RFCs or drafts? Seems like
something somewhere in the IETF Babel documentation should talk about
at least a way to do multicast.

 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 2386 Panoramic Circle, Apopka, FL 32703 USA

> I'm not following the DNSSD/mDNS community closely, but I'm
> under the impression that they're focusing on multicast-to-unicast proxies
> instead of site-local multicast (draft-cheshire-mdnsext-hybrid).
> There's also Sandy's BIER for Babel work, but I fear it may have been
> abandoned.
> > Perhaps the Babel WG meeting at the July IETF meeting (July 26-30)
> > should focus on multicast.
> My personal plans are to finish merging HMAC and v4-via-v6 into babeld
> mainline, and then to get back to working on network-layer mobility:
> -- Juliusz