Re: [Bier] Direction: draft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation

[Greg Shepherd <[e-mail]>]

Mike,

On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 9:27 AM Michael McBride <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi Greg,
>
>
>
> *>*To date, there has been insufficient support on the list to adopt the
> draft.
>
>
>
> We won’t know unless we ask the WG.
>
>
>
> >It is the BIER WG position at this time that a review by the 6man WG
> should take place before any further discussion in the BIER WG.
>
>
>
> You mean the bier chairs position. Either way a punt to 6man for bierv6
> work is fair. We will return and report.
>

Thanks Mike. Please keep the BIER WG updated on your progress in 6MAN.


> >6MAN WG review aside, the draft still raises significant technical
> concerns within the BIER WG. Adding replication information into a
> programmatic header does NOT add replication to programmatic forwarding
> path, nor programmatics to your replication forward path. It is at this
> point where replication begins that all prograrmmatics cease due to the
> multi-point nature of replication.  We have a nearly three decades of
> experience trying to use unicast semantics to describe multi-point
> forwarding, and sometimes learning from the past requires leaving it.
>
>
>
> Perhaps others can help me understand what this means. Regardless, what we
> will do for the time being, in bier wg, is continue working on gaining bier
> wg consensus of the requirements, in our draft-ietf-bier-ipv6-requirements,
> to help steer the wg toward agreeable solutions.
>

I look forward to further discussions around reqs. Once we have consensus
on reqs, the WG will be open to solutions drafts in this space.

Thanks again,
Chairs
(Shep)


> mike
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks you,
>
> Chairs
>