Subject: [Bof-srv6ops] Proposed path forward…
From: Warren Kumari <[email-masked]>
To: bof-srv6ops <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 May 2024 17:27:48
List-Id: BoF-SRv6-Operations <bof-srv6ops.ietf.org>

Hi all,

Firstly, thank you all again for making the BoF successful, and apologies
for how long it has taken for this update.

Jim Guichard, Dhruv and I have had a number of discussions about the best
way forward; there was clearly a significant amount of operational topics
raised during the BoF, and so clearly there is interest… but there are also
clearly landmines which people pointed out, and which we need to avoid.

These include:

1: Concerns around clarity about where specific work would be performed —
we have many existing working groups (including SPRING and V6OPS) which
relate to SRv6, and we don’t want conflicts.

2: Minimizing the potential for conflict between the (proposed) SRv6OPS WG
and SPRING. A conflict within a WG is bad, but it becomes worse if it turns
into a cross-WG fight.

3: Having SRv6OPS impose (non-operational) requirements on SPRING, or
artificially constrain what SPRING (or 6MAN or V6OPS, or…) is developing.

Many of these concerns can be mitigated by better coordination and
collaboration, and so what I am proposing is chartering an SRv6OPS Working
Group in the Ops Area, but with Jim (who is the AD for SPRING as the
responsible AD). We also added “The Segment Routing (SR) instantiation on
the IPv6 data plane is referred to as SRv6” to help clarify the
relationship between SRv6 and IPv6.

We also tweaked the charter to hopefully foster collaboration and
coordination - this includes things like clarifying the scope, and the
relationship between SRv6OPS and other working groups, specifying that the
chairs will discuss document adoption with the AD, etc.

I’d like to start the chartering process soon, but Jim, Dhruv and I also
wanted to share the plan and the tweaked charter so y’all are aware.

The charter:
https://github.com/SRv6-Operations/IETF119-SRv6-Operations-Bof/blob/main/SRv6OPS-Charter.md

The updates:

https://github.com/SRv6-Operations/IETF119-SRv6-Operations-Bof/compare/aa36362~5...aa36362

Thank you all,
Warren, Jim and Dhruv.