Re: [Idr] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-idr-rfc5575bis-23: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Alvaro Retana <> Mon, 27 April 2020 15:12 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id BABE33A0C58; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 08:12:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id awdcXGfAhHTs; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 08:12:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 262503A053E; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 08:12:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id s10so21016443wrr.0; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 08:12:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=I+Wi4GFRRh7mdumes0pnJzJ1Jl53GidBNxm/0qCnTtA=; b=MH2PWtaJPKBzx0E5t5/neClNKmjzVNrVLtIG3UXGBZb+jBcJyw/IO1EPvTs6RpsUE9 3l976nAmb3vujTj2HF20SiS7+Rq6452aFSc6atJbl2W/OSwGCoQKEr8AvTKqiB+06Mfs oAy8GAfPMOTsAkifDRwot3ysgc9pWEVQT+JDIHfQgZN+eKXhyR0sEvErY5HjREIyY8l5 0PHH2K42FD+6KY3WMfigRkhVvvi/cOjwKZDXq0G2rBE9fgJ0PdKdXC1agwefY72Vlc/s FZRmRYvBj8ipqf1M9mJzrTeJgoP0G9NU2LjdiWNAcv8IFJ00ny1/W0p2hiAyV572vCsA kOBw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=I+Wi4GFRRh7mdumes0pnJzJ1Jl53GidBNxm/0qCnTtA=; b=pW4cx6Zu+e40hWZHcZede1iOTdj8Pi/fw8ojyRs2BgrCdxCUjpGXnsHKKiLmQHnXLW ibcIHtu4XmdFPKJXUzQpIdcNYD1mrwKZKFPGUz+fu699NZLmop3dxCOdsCSXRpkF0P9+ +HM9DOmYMtAHMd2l9dynNfZHCNAvbQSguneZuYJO9C4Im7b3r7Uo/PXO1fzoEV/zbK4Y +vfaDpDMmRZzrggwVzdFu36fWyyC6BBVdk6ZpqLxWsROV5L1b5IF5dkmf4v1e/RBGQVI +xM3wKXivPziMNKGbzmhY3UdAOnWmva0GBe2DmA8Rj18ZEp2bMrjOmvnpl6JknZ6j+Cn GOfQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuZMDnbD2kUHWnEKLB2cdz63Kz871UkfuiBVnSA/q0T597ozmh9B Tcm2hAChVqlDdtW1Y7pbW97ovEgX8ivTNVj6k72Ib4jF
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypLppsBReC/WTBh78b0oHSlws9dVD189SEi8mLjQBlCLMai2jKmC8CHJ3Js+9h2Y5cQVE8ortQ2CwwoWF9w4U18=
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:610e:: with SMTP id v14mr27291758wrt.159.1588000346424; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 08:12:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 1058052472880 named unknown by with HTTPREST; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 15:12:25 +0000
From: Alvaro Retana <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2020 15:12:25 +0000
Message-ID: <>
To: Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <>, "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <>, The IESG <>
Cc: "" <>, Jie Dong <>, "" <>, "" <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-idr-rfc5575bis-23: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2020 15:12:30 -0000

On April 27, 2020 at 10:11:21 AM, Eric Vyncke wrote:


> Thank you for your detailed reply. About your point 1), Sue has indeed
> updated the implementation wiki page and, if I understand correctly the IDR
> processes, this should allow the WGLC & publication of the IPv6 document.

WGLC is already done, it concluded last week.  In general, idr runs
the WGLC and then waits for implementations.

Right now the Shepherd is working on the write up, which should
include finalizing the implementation report.

> With this new element, do you (and the WG chairs) believe that making a
> cluster is doable ? Else, I am trusting you as responsible AD and the chairs
> to expedite the IPv6 document processing (including 'jumping the RFCE queue')
> to have them published roughly at the same time. This is indeed very similar
> to a formal cluster.

Because there's other work depending on rfc5575bis, I rather not hold
up its publication beyond the normal process.  I don't expect
significant issues with draft-ietf-idr-flow-spec-v6, but I also prefer
for them not to share their fate.

As I mentioned, once the WG asks for publication, I'll prioritize its
review.  I can also ask the IESG to approve expedited processing once
the IPv6 document is approved.

Take care!