Return-Path: 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 3BE5712084D for ; Tue, 17 Sep 2019 09:35:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.348 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.348 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DOS_OUTLOOK_TO_MX=2.845, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.399, 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 tYAFedOFeU_i for ; Tue, 17 Sep 2019 09:35:19 -0700 (PDT) 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 408FC1209AD for ; Tue, 17 Sep 2019 09:35:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Default-Received-SPF: pass (skip=loggedin (res=PASS)) x-ip-name=97.112.17.31; From: "Susan Hares" To: "'idr wg'" Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2019 12:35:16 -0400 Message-ID: <016601d56d75$e3756320$aa602960$@ndzh.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0167_01D56D54.5C663420" X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AdVtdHc29FIBUpzKSseFCqrVBuGyHA== Content-Language: en-us X-Antivirus: AVG (VPS 190917-6, 09/17/2019), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Not-Tested X-Authenticated-User: skh@ndzh.com Archived-At: Subject: [Idr] Adoption: draft-li-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy-path-segment-03.txt and draft-li-sr-policy-path-segment-01.txt [9/17 to 10/1/2019] X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org 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: Tue, 17 Sep 2019 16:35:21 -0000 This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0167_01D56D54.5C663420 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This begins a 2 week WG Adoption call two related drafts [9/17 to 10/1/2019] . draft-li-bgp-ls-sr-policy-path-segment-03.txt and . draft-li-idr-sr-policy-path-segment-01.txt. You can access these two drafts at the following location: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy-path-segment/ https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-idr-sr-policy-path-segment/ The authors have pointed out that the adoption of this draft since the following SR-MPLS Path Segment draft has been adopted: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment-00 Please consider the following questions in your responses? 1) Should this SR Policy technology be included in BGP for SR-MPLS Spring has adopted the draft, but IDR can provide feedback to spring about putting this technology in BGP. 2) Is this technology a good way to implement the required Features in BGP? 3) Is this technology ready for adoption? 4) Do you have any concerns about adopting this technology? Cheers, Susan Hares ------=_NextPart_000_0167_01D56D54.5C663420 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

This = begins a 2 week WG Adoption call two related drafts [9/17 to 10/1/2019] =

· = draft-li-bgp-ls-sr-policy-path-segment-03.txt and =

· = draft-li-idr-sr-policy-path-segment-01.txt. =

You can access these two drafts at the following = location:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-idr-bgp-ls-sr-poli= cy-path-segment/

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-idr-sr-policy-path-segmen= t/

The authors have pointed out that the adoption of this =

draft since the following = SR-MPLS Path Segment draft has been adopted:

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment-00=

Please consider the following questions in your = responses?

1) = Should this SR Policy = technology be included in BGP for SR-MPLS

Spring has adopted the draft, but IDR can = provide feedback

to spring = about putting this technology in BGP.

2) = Is this technology a good = way to implement the required

Features in BGP?

3) = Is this technology ready = for adoption?

4) = Do you have any concerns = about adopting this technology?

Cheers, = Susan Hares

------=_NextPart_000_0167_01D56D54.5C663420--