Re: [Idr] WG LC for draft-ietf-idr-entropy-09 (8/29 to 9/12/2023)

[John Scudder <[e-mail]>]

Hi Robert,

> On Sep 7, 2023, at 2:40 PM, Robert Raszuk <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> To say it differently if you would follow the draft name and this thread subject and call new attribute ELCv3 indicator I guess I would not many comments. 

That is not how it went down during the WG adoption call [1] for draft-scudder-idr-entropy-label, which was almost exactly what you described. The chairs at that time judged the consensus [2] to do two things: adopt the draft, and discuss further what to do about the generalized case. After more discussion, we determined it was feasible to subsume ELCv3 into NHC, and posted about it on the list [3][4] with the subject "RCA = ELCv3 + NHC”. (That message also touched on both the draft's filename and the attribute's name.) A few days later, we presented [5] the merged draft at the IDR interim [6]. I don’t see formal minutes but the notepad is available. [7] Every subsequent revision has also included a summary of changes sent to the list.

As far as I can tell there’s WG consensus specifically that the WG prefers to do a container attribute with ELCv3 as a TLV within it, and not to have ELCv3 as a standalone attribute as it was originally proposed. All things can be relitigated of course, but this didn’t happen by accident or because nobody noticed — it’s the opposite.

Thanks,

—John

[1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/LBx4UK9zO3If2O3qnEiR9EalWoo/
[2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/cMS-cS7EFIXdI4UAl7hVrxFGnbE/
[3] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/PXbjlAR8bx7jSHt4HShI2A0K97M/
[4] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/z9_XXMnuZbpgmLo0xKSYoWjrrf0/
[5] https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2022-idr-04/materials/slides-interim-2022-idr-04-sessa-bgp-entropy-label-capability-version-3-00
[6] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/agenda-interim-2022-idr-04-idr-01/
[7] https://notes.ietf.org/notes-ietf-interim-2022-idr-04-idr