MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000701d5eb18$71a02200$54e06600$@ndzh.com>
In-Reply-To: <000701d5eb18$71a02200$54e06600$@ndzh.com>
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 14:55:05 +0100
Message-ID: 
 <CAOj+MMGQxtv9NYWzeJGg4s_C66PoGbcU-bufQ=aeOaLRjw0-Ew@mail.gmail.com>
To: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>
Cc: "idr@ietf. org" <idr@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000098a8f7059f52b87f"
Archived-At: 
 <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/CRVHQ_NC5DkZLW0UCCu56a_Z1n8>
Subject: Re: [Idr] IPR Call for draft-li-idr-flowspec-srv6
Precedence: list

--00000000000098a8f7059f52b87f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi,

I think there is an agreement in place to hold any further flow spec
extensions till Flow Spec v2 (with new SAFI) base spec will be at least a
WG document.

Based on the above I recommend to wait with the adoption call till the
draft is able to reference Flow Spec v2 or perhaps directly be used on its
day one input.

Thx,
R.

On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 2:44 PM Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com> wrote:

> Greetings:
>
>
>
> This begins a IPR call for /raft-li-idr-flowspec-srv6-02.txt.  The
> adoption call will begin after all authors have responded to this email
> with an IPR statement.  For the authors who have responded before, you wi=
ll
> need to respond to this email message as well.
>
>
>
> A bit thanks to the authors who have waited patiently for the IDR chairs.
>
>
>
> For the WG general discussion on IDR flow specification,  this call is to
> inquiry if this draft=E2=80=99s approach is useful.   As has been discuss=
ed on the
> list, the IETF 107 IDR working group meeting will need to decide if all
> additions to flow specification should go into  a version 2
> specification.
>
>
>
> In order to have a fruitful discussion regarding the amount of additions
> for flow specification, we will be calling for the WG to discuss any
> potential Flow specification drafts.
>
>
>
> Cheers, Sue
> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list
> Idr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
>

--00000000000098a8f7059f52b87f
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">Hi,<div><br></div><div>I think there is an agreement=C2=A0=
in place to hold any further flow spec extensions till Flow Spec v2 (with n=
ew SAFI) base spec will be at least a WG document.=C2=A0</div><div><br></di=
v><div>Based on the above I recommend to wait with the adoption call till t=
he draft is able to reference=C2=A0Flow Spec v2 or perhaps=C2=A0directly be=
 used on its day one input.=C2=A0</div><div><br></div><div>Thx,</div><div>R=
.</div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail=
_attr">On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 2:44 PM Susan Hares &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:sh=
ares@ndzh.com">shares@ndzh.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D=
"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(2=
04,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div lang=3D"EN-US"><div><p class=3D"MsoNorma=
l">Greetings: <u></u><u></u></p><p class=3D"MsoNormal"><u></u>=C2=A0<u></u>=
</p><p class=3D"MsoNormal">This begins a IPR call for /raft-li-idr-flowspec=
-srv6-02.txt.=C2=A0 The adoption call will begin after all authors have res=
ponded to this email with an IPR statement.=C2=A0 For the authors who have =
responded before, you will need to respond to this email message as well. =
=C2=A0<u></u><u></u></p><p class=3D"MsoNormal"><u></u>=C2=A0<u></u></p><p c=
lass=3D"MsoNormal">A bit thanks to the authors who have waited patiently fo=
r the IDR chairs.=C2=A0 <u></u><u></u></p><p class=3D"MsoNormal"><u></u>=C2=
=A0<u></u></p><p class=3D"MsoNormal">For the WG general discussion on IDR f=
low specification,=C2=A0 this call is to inquiry if this draft=E2=80=99s ap=
proach is useful. =C2=A0=C2=A0As has been discussed on the list, the IETF 1=
07 IDR working group meeting will need to decide if all additions to flow s=
pecification should go into =C2=A0a version 2 specification.=C2=A0=C2=A0 <u=
></u><u></u></p><p class=3D"MsoNormal"><u></u>=C2=A0<u></u></p><p class=3D"=
MsoNormal">In order to have a fruitful discussion regarding the amount of a=
dditions for flow specification, we will be calling for the WG to discuss a=
ny potential Flow specification drafts. <u></u><u></u></p><p class=3D"MsoNo=
rmal"><u></u>=C2=A0<u></u></p><p class=3D"MsoNormal">Cheers, Sue <u></u><u>=
</u></p></div></div>_______________________________________________<br>
Idr mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:Idr@ietf.org" target=3D"_blank">Idr@ietf.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr" rel=3D"noreferrer" ta=
rget=3D"_blank">https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr</a><br>
</blockquote></div>

--00000000000098a8f7059f52b87f--