Re: [Idr] Adoption call for draft-dawra-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext [5/2 - 5/16/2018]

["Susan Hares" <[e-mail]>]

Tom:

It is easy to have the authors change the name, and link the old draft to the new draft's name.    I'll address this issue later today or early tomorrow.   

I'm pushing out WG LC, shepherd reports, adoption calls, and issue calls before I attend to name changes today.   People have 4 weeks to finalize drafts before IETF 106 - so I'm completing the things that WG members need to take action on.   

Cheerily, Susan Hares 

-----Original Message-----
From: Idr [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of tom petch
Sent: Tuesday, June 4, 2019 8:02 AM
To: Susan Hares; 'Robert Raszuk'
Cc: 'idr@ietf. org'
Subject: Re: [Idr] Adoption call for draft-dawra-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext [5/2 - 5/16/2018]

Sue

Sorry I was too terse, but yes, Christoph and Robert provided the expansion.

Draft names do disappear with the RFC but then there are times we need to look back at the history, and then, having a single name for the adopted I-D is simplest. On the other hand, when I search or collate the names, in folders, e-mails etc having a common string - bgp-ls rather than bgpls - makes things easier for me to find.

So changing the name complicates things, leaving it as-is complicates things. Grrr why did I not spot this prior to adoption?

On balance, I think leave the name as is but I want you to agree with this.

Tom Petch

----- Original Message -----
From: "Susan Hares" <[e-mail]>
To: "'Robert Raszuk'" <[e-mail]>
Cc: "'idr@ietf. org'" <[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2019 11:50 AM
Subject: Re: [Idr] Adoption call for draft-dawra-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext
[5/2 - 5/16/2018]


Robert:

Ah…  thanks for unpacking Tom’s message.    Since John and I are focused
on getting all the WG drafts toward RFC (where the draft name does not matter), I had not consider this point.  Acee and Chris in LSR have
standardized on a particular form of bgp-ls.   Tom Petch has a good
point.

As to the 99% of BGP-LS,  that’s a question the chairs and ADs tried to
ask the WG in 2018.   The WG did not engage on that discussion.

In order to protect the BGP stream,  the ADs/Chairs pushed for draft-ketana-rfc7752bis.txt (for improved error handling) and larger BGP messages (see raft-ietf-idr-bgp-extended-messages-30.txt).

Cheerily,

 Sue Hares







From: Idr [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Robert Raszuk
Sent: Tuesday, June 4, 2019 6:30 AM
To: Susan Hares
Cc: idr@ietf. org
Subject: Re: [Idr] Adoption call for draft-dawra-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext
[5/2 - 5/16/2018]



Hi Sue,



To me Tom was simply pointing out difference in name if the draft where dash is missing in "bgp-ls" string in this specific case.



On the other points you have raised I think it is missing the fundamental one ... since when what used to be a wg focused in the past on interdomain routing became a mainstream of link state, topology, bfd, pce data collection and distribution.



Even charter aside IMO by shifting IDR focus and processing 99% of BGP-LS related documents we are doing huge disservice to Internet and routing related needs without even bringing the aspect of protocol pollution.



Kind regards,

R.



On Tue, Jun 4, 2019, 12:07 Susan Hares <[e-mail]> wrote:

Tom:

Your short mail usually has good suggestions, so I tried to decode this message - but I failed.  I'm guessing at the question.

If this question is about the multiple drafts for the BGP-LS, see my message yesterday to Jeff regarding drafts from LSR with BGP-LS code points and early allocations.
If this question is about BGP-LS error handling, see my wish/hope that draft the draft-ketana-rfc7752bis.txt will be ready for adoption soon.
If this question is about early code point allocation,  this early allocation policy is IESG/IANA policy.  If you wish me to ask for a change, please unpack the message so I can work on it.

Cheerily, Susan

-----Original Message-----
From: Idr [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of tom petch
Sent: Tuesday, June 4, 2019 4:44 AM
To: Ketan Talaulikar (ketant); Susan Hares; [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [Idr] Adoption call for draft-dawra-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext
[5/2 -
5/16/2018]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)" <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, June 03, 2019 2:36 AM

Hello All,

The WG version of this draft has been posted as below

<tp>

You have done exactly what you were asked to do, but it is unfortunate that all the other ID have bgp-ls while this has bgpls.

Sue,

Are you happy to live with this?

Tom Petch


https://datatracker..ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext-00
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext-00>

We would like to request for early code point allocation from IANA to enable implementations with suggested code points as indicated below:

   The following codepoints is suggested (to be assigned by IANA) from
   within the sub-registry called "BGP-LS NLRI-Types":

    +------+----------------------------+---------------+
    | Type | NLRI Type                  |   Reference   |
    +------+----------------------------+---------------+
    |  6   | SRv6 SID                   | this document |
    +------+----------------------------+---------------+

   The following TLV codepoints are suggested (to be assigned by IANA)
   from within the sub-registry called "BGP-LS Node Descriptor, Link
   Descriptor, Prefix Descriptor, and Attribute TLVs":

   +----------+----------------------------------------+---------------+
   | TLV Code |             Description                | Value defined |
   |  Point   |                                        |       in      |
   +----------+----------------------------------------+---------------+
   |  1038    |   SRv6 Capabilities TLV                | this document |
   |  1106    |   SRv6 End.X SID TLV                   | this document |
   |  1107    |   IS-IS SRv6 LAN End.X SID TLV         | this document |
  |  1108    |   OSPFv3 SRv6 LAN End.X SID TLV        | this document |
   |  1162    |   SRv6 Locator TLV                     | this document |
   |   518    |   SRv6 SID Information TLV             | this document |
   |  1250    |   SRv6 Endpoint Function TLV           | this document |

   |  1251    |   SRv6 BGP Peer Node SID TLV           | this document |
   +----------+----------------------------------------+---------------+


Thanks,
Ketan

From: Susan Hares <[e-mail]>
Sent: 30 May 2019 06:07
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [Idr] Adoption call for draft-dawra-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext
[5/2 - 5/16/2018]

draft-dwara-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext has been adopted.
The authors should submit the draft as:
draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext-00.txt.

As soon as this draft has been submitted, an early code point allocation call will begin.

Cheerily, Sue




------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------


> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
>

_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr

_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr




------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------


> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
>

_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr