Re: [Idr] IPR Call for draft-li-idr-flowspec-srv6

"Susan Hares" <shares@ndzh.com> Mon, 24 February 2020 14:03 UTC

Return-Path: <shares@ndzh.com>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB6D53A0BE4 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Feb 2020 06:03:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.225
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.225 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DOS_OUTLOOK_TO_MX=2.845, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.276, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DzV6gty1Mm1h for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Feb 2020 06:03:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hickoryhill-consulting.com (50-245-122-100-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [50.245.122.100]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3136B3A0BE3 for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Feb 2020 06:03:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Default-Received-SPF: pass (skip=loggedin (res=PASS)) x-ip-name=166.177.57.99;
From: "Susan Hares" <shares@ndzh.com>
To: "'Robert Raszuk'" <robert@raszuk.net>
Cc: "'idr@ietf. org'" <idr@ietf.org>
References: <000701d5eb18$71a02200$54e06600$@ndzh.com> <CAOj+MMGQxtv9NYWzeJGg4s_C66PoGbcU-bufQ=aeOaLRjw0-Ew@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOj+MMGQxtv9NYWzeJGg4s_C66PoGbcU-bufQ=aeOaLRjw0-Ew@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 09:03:07 -0500
Message-ID: <005301d5eb1b$245bfbb0$6d13f310$@ndzh.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0054_01D5EAF1.3B894F10"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQFAt0LXlOPhuENPHBUN7FNDwzFqTAFzrM2vqUko0CA=
Content-Language: en-us
X-Antivirus: AVG (VPS 200223-0, 02/23/2020), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Not-Tested
X-Authenticated-User: skh@ndzh.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/H0kJK9s4MsYqWOyis7l2F70mTYk>
Subject: Re: [Idr] IPR Call for draft-li-idr-flowspec-srv6
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idr/>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 14:03:15 -0000

Robert: 

 

My understanding matches your understanding of the next steps for Flow Specification.   However, I could not find the email from John Scudder stating this fact.   Perhaps I missed it. 

 

As a chair, I would like to find out whether people are interested in addingdraft-li-idr-flowspec-srv6 capability to the flow specification family.   I also would like to find out if there is any IPR on this technology.   So, perhaps this IPR call is necessary. 

 

I will probably word my next call about the draft to be an “interest” call after John Scudder sends his email .   

 

Cheers, Sue 

 

 

From: Idr [mailto:idr-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Robert Raszuk
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2020 8:55 AM
To: Susan Hares
Cc: idr@ietf. org
Subject: Re: [Idr] IPR Call for draft-li-idr-flowspec-srv6

 

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 will 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’s approach is useful.   As has been discussed 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