Re: [Bier] Request an adoption call ondraft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation-05

["Xiejingrong (Jingrong)" <[e-mail]>]

Thank you very much Tony !
Appreciate greatly if you could get on call with Greg and find the time to look @ the minutes as well as the new version of draft that I am requesting for adoption call.

Best regards,
Jingrong

From: Tony Przygienda [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2020 10:44 PM
To: zhang.zheng <[e-mail]>
Cc: Xiejingrong (Jingrong) <[e-mail]>; BIER WG Chairs <[e-mail]>; BIER WG <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Request an adoption call ondraft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation-05

I will try to get on call with Greg this week if we manage to find the time and we'll look @ the minutes/new version of draft and direct further ...

thanks

--- tony

On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 7:10 AM <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:

Hi Jingrong,



Sorry, I don't know you can't remember that there is consensus with the irrelevance between BIER and SRv6.

SRv6 doesn't exist in BIER charter at all. So I mention it again for draft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation.



The homenet is one of the deployment of BIERin6 (draft-zhang-bier-bierin6).

About the draft process, I believe that chair control the WG process reasonably.



Thanks,

Sandy


原始邮件
发件人：Xiejingrong(Jingrong) <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
收件人：张征00007940;
抄送人：[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>;[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>;[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>;[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>;
日 期 ：2020年03月10日 18:15
主 题 ：RE: Re:Request an adoption call ondraft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation-05
Dear Sandy,

I suppose I have addressed all the comments received on the draft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation, and that’s the main point in my request of adoption in Jan 2020 and today.
Please point out what’s the comments that haven’t addressed.

Thanks for remind me the IETF105 meeting minutes.
I don’t know why that said thing “Take it to list” didn’t happen after 7 months !
Is it assumed that some questions are not addressed or not clear ---- for example, security considerations? Or the said “Primary intended use is HOMENET” does not explicitly declared in the document ?

Thanks
Jingrong

From: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> [mailto:[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>]
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2020 4:59 PM
To: Xiejingrong (Jingrong) <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Cc: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Subject: Re:Request an adoption call ondraft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation-05


Hi Jingrong,



Before being in adoption call, you may need to solve all the question about (draft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation) at first (in meeting and mailing list).

Its a pit that you didn't konw the consensus withdraft-zhang-bier-bierin6 even if you were on BIER WG bluesheet in IETF105# (https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/105/bluesheets/bluesheets-105-bier-201907241330-00.pdf).

Please have a look at the minutes again (https://tools.ietf.org/wg/bier/minutes?item=minutes-105-bier-01.html).

I think it's a baseline that the draft has gotten consensus in WG before it's taken to the adoption list.



BTW: You may have misunderstanding about WG secretary.

AFAIK, WG secretary just does WG routine work, and there is no relationship with technology discussion and routine work.

Let's back to the technology discussion. Thanks!



Thanks

Sandy


原始邮件
发件人：Xiejingrong(Jingrong) <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
收件人：张征00007940;
抄送人：[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>;[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>;[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>;[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>;
日 期 ：2020年03月10日 15:57
主 题 ：RE: Re:Request an adoption call ondraft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation-05
Dear Sandy,

With all due respect, I am curious whether you speak as individual or WG secretary.

More comments inline.

Thanks
Jingrong

From:[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2020 2:57 PM
To: Xiejingrong (Jingrong) <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Cc: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Subject: Re:Request an adoption call on draft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation-05


Hi Jingrong,



I don't think this solution (draft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation) has gotten consensus in BIER working group.

[XJR] I think an adoption call is to verify the existence of consensus, rather than reverse.

However, there is another BIER IPv6 solution (draft-zhang-bier-bierin6) has gotten consensus in the WG.

[XJR] This claim of consensus looks even more strange to me, as you are one author of this draft, and also the secretary of BIER WG. I believe only WG chairs or AD  can declare such  consensus.

The latest presentation is in IETF105# and it has been in adoption list.

BTW: I don't think there is straight relationship with BIER and SRv6. But draft-zhang-bier-bierin6 works well with SRv6 without any extra specification.



Thanks

Sandy




原始邮件
发件人：Xiejingrong(Jingrong) <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
收件人：[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>;
抄送人：BIER WG <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>;[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>;[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>;
日 期 ：2020年03月10日10:37
主 题 ：RE: Request an adoption call on draft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation-05
Dear WG Chairs,

We've just updated a new revision of bier-ipv6-encapsulation. Main updates:
1. Use the Next Header value 143 for Ethernet packet in IP/IPv6.
2. Update the “security consideration” section. further includes:
2.1 Explain the BIER domain and BIER sub-domain that may spanning multiple ASes operated by a single operator.
2.2 Simply refer the security considerations of Inter-domain deployment to RFC8296, and remove the section 5.2 “Inter-domain deployment”.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation/
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation-06

The first update about Next Header value 143 is based on the significant progress of Native IPv6 solution that is happening in industry, below for reference:
SRv6 PGM (in its LC) has applied the Proto value 143 for Ethernet packet in IP/IPv6:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming/

The second update is based on the Tony’s comment before IETF106 about security deployment, and suggestion from Dirk recently.
We hope this could address the concerns about security deployment of BIERv6, as well as other comments received on IETF106:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bier/1DP5hGPrPsiC3OE5skm2yaN6tQM/

Again, we believe this draft is stable and ready for adoption, and the BIER WG charter item 7 "BIER natively in IPv6" should advance.
Thank you very much for consideration!

Best Regards,
Jingrong


From: BIER [mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Xiejingrong (Jingrong)
Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2020 9:27 AM
To: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Cc: BIER WG <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>;[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>;[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Subject: [Bier] Request an adoption call on draft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation-05

Dear WG Chairs:

We would like to request an adoption call on draft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation-05.
We've presented this proposal for about two years and it had led to the writing and adoption of draft-ietf-bier-ipv6-requirements.
We've addressed the comments received in the past 2 years.
We've seen lots of interest on the draft.
We believe it is stable and ready for adoption.
We think the charter item 7 "BIER natively in IPv6" should advance.

Thanks for consideration.

BTW:
I will be in spring festival for the coming 7 days but I can read the list anytime.
Happy spring festival to those who have.

Jingrong (on behalf of the authors and contributors)