[CCAMP] layer 0 type versioning

Leeyoung <leeyoung@huawei.com> Wed, 08 May 2019 21:37 UTC

Return-Path: <leeyoung@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3178D1200FB for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 May 2019 14:37:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id b9pNLz3tfEeC for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 May 2019 14:37:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EFC631200E0 for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 May 2019 14:37:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhreml704-cah.china.huawei.com (unknown []) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 476DA892D2B2877D41BF; Wed, 8 May 2019 22:37:03 +0100 (IST)
Received: from SJCEML703-CHM.china.huawei.com ( by lhreml704-cah.china.huawei.com ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Wed, 8 May 2019 22:37:02 +0100
Received: from SJCEML521-MBX.china.huawei.com ([]) by SJCEML703-CHM.china.huawei.com ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0439.000; Wed, 8 May 2019 14:36:51 -0700
From: Leeyoung <leeyoung@huawei.com>
To: "CCAMP (ccamp@ietf.org)" <ccamp@ietf.org>, Fatai Zhang <zhangfatai@huawei.com>, Daniele Ceccarelli <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com>
Thread-Topic: layer 0 type versioning
Thread-Index: AdUF48x2Wij6BRWCTXuzzIPERW/foA==
Date: Wed, 8 May 2019 21:36:50 +0000
Message-ID: <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E173D12A937@sjceml521-mbx.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E173D12A937sjceml521mbxchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/dShb810PH3HW_pgwRmYDHGgHDR0>
Subject: [CCAMP] layer 0 type versioning
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group <ccamp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ccamp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ccamp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 May 2019 21:37:07 -0000

Hi WG,

In the Prague meeting, in regard to ietf-layer0-type, the conclusion was converged toward having a separate draft for keeping ietf-layer0-types file from WSON topology draft (similar to what te-types did for TE topology/tunnel). As Italo suggested, I think it is sound to create different versions of ietf-layer0-types while the current version can move with WSON and Flexi-grid drafts. If we need change/add new grouping/parameters in the future, we can create a new version of ietf-layer0-types (with a new date, e.g.,  ietf-layer0-types@2020-10-10) to differentiate from the last version. This way, we can manage different versions of types file and avoid drafts from getting stuck with MISSREF in the RFC Queue.

So the action is to separate ietf-layer0-types from the WSON topology draft into a separate draft with a proposed draft name:  draft-ietf-ccamp-layer0-types (once rectified by the chairs). I will publish soon the two drafts (one for WSON topo and another for layer0-types). Please let us know if you have any comment/concern on this action.

Young (on behalf of co-authors)