Re: [Bier] Request for WG Adoption//FW: New Version Notification for draft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation-08.txt

["Gengxuesong (Geng Xuesong)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Greg,

Thanks for your response.
It is a pity that there was no time for this topic in IETF 107 and the other interim meeting we have been waiting for was also cancelled.
Between IETF 107 and 108, we kept updating the document following the guidance of WG:

Ÿ   Ask advice from IPv6 experts online and offline, ensuring that IPv6 extensions defined in the document are reasonable;

Ÿ   Summary all the history discussions from WG(both mailing list and previous IETF meeting minutes), closing all the technical comments in the new version;
After the work, we believe the document is quite mature and we have heard a lot of voice from operators that they need a stateless multicast solution in an IPv6 network and they want to see more progress in the standard. So we request WG adoption in the mailing list, and many WG members show their positive attitude and support the request.
If you think it is necessary to present the draft in IETF 108, we are very willing to request a time slot and introduce the progress. The information is as follows:
Draft: draft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation-08
Presenter: Xuesong Geng
Length: 10 minutes

Best Regards
Xuesong

From: Greg Shepherd [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2020 11:21 PM
To: Gengxuesong (Geng Xuesong) <[e-mail]>
Cc: Tony Przygienda <[e-mail]>; BIER WG <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Request for WG Adoption//FW: New Version Notification for draft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation-08.txt

Geng,

Thanks for the new version. Please leave all adoption calls on the list to the Chairs. Additionally, it doesn't require adoption for participants to read and comment. And any call for adoption should come after there has been adequate time for the group to read and evaluate. But more importantly, you and I spoke about your draft getting adequate time for discussion at the upcoming WG meeting. This will give you yet another attempt to build support and make your case for adoption to the group. Please stay focused on your upcoming presentation.

Thanks,
Shep,
(Chairs)


On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 6:15 AM Gengxuesong (Geng Xuesong) <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
Hi Tony,

Thank you for your response.
We are not calling for adoption by ourselves, as the subject shows, we are “requesting WG adoption”. What we are trying to do is just inviting more people to review the draft, and at the same time, we are glad to see that quite some of them are interested in this topic and would like to show their support in the mailing list.
I agree that technical comments are very important for us. Actually, there have been a lot of technical discussions about this draft in WG, and we have updated the draft based on these comments, including:
1.      Whether IPv6 Extensions defined in the draft are reasonable and go along with RFC 8200 (especially section 4.2 “options”, section 4.6 “Destination Options Header”) and other IPv6 rules:
-        We have taken the draft to 6MAN mailing list and asked for review and advice twice, respectively in March and July; There is no objection in 6MAN and all we get is positive voice;
2.      How to support BIER OAM:
-        In section 3.1 of the document, we have updated the descriptions about how to use “Proto” field, what is the relationship between “Proto” and “Next Header” and what has been updated compared to RFC8296 Section 2.1.1 ;
3.      Security Considerations:
-        We have added “section 5 security” , giving instructions to handle with different kinds of possible security threats;
4.      Concerns about using unicast IPv6 address to convey multicast packet:
-        We have added Appendix C to explain why it works and what benefits it will bring;
5.      Is there any requirement for BIERv6 ?
-        Yes. With the deployments of SRv6 for unicast, operators are searching for stateless multicast solution in IPv6 domain, aligning with the design of SRv6.
-        Yes. A lot of operators love the idea of “Native IPv6 BIER” and think it is a promising solution that could be used in the IPv6 network.
-        We believe that the idea of BIERv6 will be very helpful to the further development of BIER and IPv6.
Besides these aspects, we are always open to any other technical comments on the list.
If you have any suggestions about how to move the document forward, please also let us know.

Best Regards
Xuesong

From: Tony Przygienda [mailto:[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>]
Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2020 4:08 PM
To: Gengxuesong (Geng Xuesong) <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Cc: BIER WG <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Request for WG Adoption//FW: New Version Notification for draft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation-08.txt

<as chair>

To make it perfectly clear, it is not up to the authors and only within the chairs' competence to call for adoption so save yourself any +1 here please as they serve no further purpose @ this point in time. Technical discussion on the draft is obviously welcome on the list.

thanks

--- tony

On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 8:31 AM Gengxuesong (Geng Xuesong) <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:

Dear BIER WG,



We have published a new version of draft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation-08*, and we would like to request WG adoption for the document.



Best Regards

Xuesong

----

Per the direction of WG, we have asked 6man’s review. We’ve received all positive comments with some great editorial suggestions.

In this version, we have updated the document based these feedback:

1.      Reasonability of using IPv6 unicast address is confirmed, so extra descriptions in section 3.2 are removed and put into Appendix C;

2.      A diagram showing BIERv6 packet processing in an IPv6 domain is added in section 4 to show how a BIERv6 packet goes through a non-BIER IPv6 node;

3.      Descriptions about the relationship between BIERv6 and BIER are added in Appendix A; The corresponding control plane extensions are added in Appendix B;

The document have also addressed all the concerns that has been raised in BIER WG:

1.      How BIERv6 could support BIER architecture defined in RFC 8279, including OAM;

2.      How BIERv6 security is guaranteed;

3.      The technical benefits brought by BIERv6;

After all the updates , we believe the document is ready for WG adoption.



> -----Original Message-----

> From: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> [mailto:[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>]

> Sent: Monday, July 13, 2020 2:26 PM

> To: Xiejingrong (Jingrong) <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; Gengxuesong (Geng

> Xuesong) <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; Rajiv Asati <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; Liang

> Geng <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; Gyan Mishra

> <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; MooChang Shin <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>;

> Senthil Dhanaraj <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; Yongqing Zhu

> <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; Mike McBride <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>;

> Zhuangzhuang Qin <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>

> Subject: New Version Notification for draft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation-08.txt

>

>

> A new version of I-D, draft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation-08.txt

> has been successfully submitted by Xuesong Geng and posted to the IETF

> repository.

>

> Name:            draft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation

> Revision:        08

> Title:               Encapsulation for BIER in Non-MPLS IPv6 Networks

> Document date:   2020-07-13

> Group:            Individual Submission

> Pages:            21

> URL:

> https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation-08.txt

> Status:

> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation/

> Htmlized:

> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation-08

> Htmlized:

> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation

> Diff:

> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation-08

>

> Abstract:

>    This document proposes a BIER IPv6 (BIERv6) encapsulation for Non-

>    MPLS IPv6 Networks using the IPv6 Destination Option extension

>    header.  This document updates RFC 8296.

>

>

>

>

>

> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission

> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org<http://tools.ietf.org>.

>

> The IETF Secretariat

>