Re: [Idr] Review of draft-abraitis-bgp-version-capability-07

[Alvaro Retana <[e-mail]>]

On August 21, 2020 at 5:32:57 PM, Robert Raszuk wrote:


Robert:

Hi!


...
> Also I am not sure what Alvaro expects IDR and chairs to do here. To adopt
> the draft which insists on using BGP Capabilities to carry a free form text
> when there may not be rough consensus to do so ?
>
> Or maybe to take a problem at hand and work together to produce a solution
> which may not use BGP Capabilities at all ?
...
> PS. As to the use of "bypass" term I did not mean to say that this has been
> hidden in any form or shape ... quite contrary. WG says this is not good
> solution then going around WG is what I call a bypass.

Thank you for clarifying.


The Independent Submission Stream can be used (among other things) to
publish ideas that have not been adopted, or even rejected, by the
IETF.  The only IETF involvement is the rfc5742 conflict review, which
is where we are now: in short, the IESG is expected to answer whether
the work conflicts with IETF work, and make a recommendation.  See the
possible outcomes in §3/rfc5742.

Note that at this point, the work is not part of the IETF.


Even if not required by rfc5742, I decided to technically review the
document and post my comments to this list.  In reviewing the mail
archive, I didn't see an explicit call for adoption or direction from
the chairs to take the document to the ISE, just lack of interest (not
a lot of comments). So I also sent a separate note to the idr-chairs
asking for their opinion.

What do I expect?  I first expect an answer from the Chairs -- from my
last message:

   John/Sue:  What is your opinion?  Do we need time to discuss interest in
   idr?

I don't expect adoption, or for the WG to take on related work...or
not.  It is for the Chairs to lead any discussion about adoption or
anything else, hence my question above.  Apart from that, I'm sure
that the ISE will appreciate any comments that can make the document
better.


Going back to rfc5742.  Assuming that my comments (in this thread) are
addressed, I consider that the work is (obviously!) related to idr,
but that it doesn't prevent publishing (in the Independent Submission
stream).  I currently don't see active work that explicitly[*]
addresses the same type of functionality.  I would be happy to be
corrected and for the Chairs to confirm.


Thanks!

Alvaro.


[*] The Operational Message could include similar functionality...I'm
sure there could be other approaches.  However, I don't see that
documented anywhere or active discussion on the list about it.