[Idr] Re: [Pce] Issue raised in RTG-DIR review of draft-ietf-idr-sr-policy-nrp-04
Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 11 December 2025 20:28 UTC
Return-Path: <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: idr@mail2.ietf.org
Delivered-To: idr@mail2.ietf.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D7E09943E69 for <idr@mail2.ietf.org>; Thu, 11 Dec 2025 12:28:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: mail2.ietf.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VCOJK_8RrieF for <idr@mail2.ietf.org>; Thu, 11 Dec 2025 12:28:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pf1-x435.google.com (mail-pf1-x435.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::435]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B33E99943D5E for <idr@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 Dec 2025 12:28:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pf1-x435.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-7bc248dc16aso455024b3a.0 for <idr@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 Dec 2025 12:28:17 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1765484890; x=1766089690; darn=ietf.org; h=to:subject:message-id:date:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=rjRe1xJscNiHJ/CgG5N3Etoz7j7zoRqXbLlzgEJS5Mg=; b=BPRjWv15NHCKSlw5R56H0kWiL+cHwGRJ8/LPmNBp/80xSjQOfa2QyYVPFKjar4tW5U WaxL7YbIRDJFgX6TY1/aXdiebu1YBMmqWcau0prpwjUXC77JgU57Vb2GUnTKD3/hm2PW sCEDD8ls+xoHBMVDvK6z2gHXxNp+14TcgerGh2KyORluVZ7/wJfcI03XUyEha1RI7VRP JbVDznkyS7AchVE9nY4KRmPT1te0qylErtN9Z4MGV/PItG0jQ3Skea+sJn5oY0b9sam3 wP21oUUkFgwEhLJklDao5NCr+01xonqoeKw8fl6GUg1LPQ5HPfHRZOyT+maCpB7Pewfq CmDw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1765484890; x=1766089690; h=to:subject:message-id:date:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from :x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=rjRe1xJscNiHJ/CgG5N3Etoz7j7zoRqXbLlzgEJS5Mg=; b=YUiR6V7Ast5qck37HFhDwemGiVIQDn8rwOv1czy9vINUgPjn4lazMSMlBf3l7vS6A0 O4+mLOo8OH6QJYac4O6HQTl+MTO6EkoMh6uFt7qd+3MsH8QiS8Kh6dr4Q55dyyuuBWHw QO/6oJaPdzHYMxSNocw0A5LdREcA60LFEtBuXry3BB6zudOaFu1gpfYv/khS9RiOLtUQ cVrNqmsyHKMkyAo3tEfZJtRS88lkkatciomO+CBfrHeJnJFMtEl0UhYuYjXkSk0xwOgu sYLi4msXbGTXSOPgLaUfyRPnMWEmVyN9oRxLL+2f+SVa9HbhbQEtM5p8G8F+MMc6M6Re Q+cA==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCU0bhSGBV1rY+JVOn418Fm9a8NI0zxSqUcBNcuDs2vklMSTAqBnP8XSThUH26q7aChtyeY=@ietf.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yxuj+vOLo4ZtXy8/sD5UmEpkstrAKR8t6+3N9g8qIFMyyl7wka/ x/iPe2LR2EhtGG89cKfjJLbeZX2xTCf4pMkgzLQ884ZdeC+PxwjAloMwzK6gyUmKCDF8xflF1RB nLiYLCPmL5inMnJx/dbA6dCH/fejWtR0=
X-Gm-Gg: AY/fxX7owJxGg9URq/vvXCFR7tL/YmvjSKIxd19Osw6nlzkxjiGAsAAB57uxW0f/9cn ycg9EwrDW/kH3rAU0XYfSXBvaayXXCFcPFeWmXIzozI8XPUrBdvmjucC9CTDDTdq+6KHVM0LVvt uYqtYlD+/YdrSW21aFEj/JhDoD/DnrLADcbu4aG7zfiuRQ9xNUDjn5ffzSjj+RuWUxakIyC7cy4 4uImNzOzFAW1JcS6rgw9Cj6/UXLqZk8KiSN0S9XDkPEsioTLSL2wOdyVbRKJ6DJaoqcYrKjXUpf DR63gepZpYUBJ/MJvQv65slM8Wg8
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEOkMgZHUFSXgHKQnsPXaj8y1knhpdGePFSzAsF2geRPY6eLBWaU648KHeAVfn3c84GJFmEsdpDl8KoE/WZDh4=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:701a:c945:b0:11b:9386:8271 with SMTP id a92af1059eb24-11f296ecb47mr4497312c88.46.1765484890414; Thu, 11 Dec 2025 12:28:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 1058052472880 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Thu, 11 Dec 2025 20:28:09 +0000
Received: from 1058052472880 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Thu, 11 Dec 2025 20:28:09 +0000
From: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <DM8PR08MB7413FA1439C19B4076F6D759B3A1A@DM8PR08MB7413.namprd08.prod.outlook.com>
References: <DM8PR08MB7413FA1439C19B4076F6D759B3A1A@DM8PR08MB7413.namprd08.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2025 20:28:09 +0000
X-Gm-Features: AQt7F2oRLqPJlHVL5_WLpszrclIX5GOyhSmcy_ei_1Hethp8YQb4PSx8KBTRgt8
Message-ID: <CAMMESsyXp0NwkD2Vj3UcJj1mzSKM7ubLh9VPQfpDPXVhDBXAUQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>, Path Computation Element Discussion List <pce@ietf.org>, "idr@ietf. org" <idr@ietf.org>, SPRING WG List <spring@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000bfe0fc0645b2fb6f"
Message-ID-Hash: DBKWKDYCOSP72EXH4XH225CQD7WORR5N
X-Message-ID-Hash: DBKWKDYCOSP72EXH4XH225CQD7WORR5N
X-MailFrom: aretana.ietf@gmail.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-idr.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [Idr] Re: [Pce] Issue raised in RTG-DIR review of draft-ietf-idr-sr-policy-nrp-04
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/pXD81-bd2m4z2QsEmGqOfXLkhGI>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idr>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:idr-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:idr-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:idr-leave@ietf.org>
On December 10, 2025 at 8:47:22 PM, Susan Hares wrote: Sue: Hi! Replying only about the adoption process: ... > 1) draft-jiang-spring-sr-policy-nrp-04 is on adoption queue (at the bottom). > when will Spring review the validity of section 3? The queue is roughly ordered by when the adoption request was received, not by the order in which the call will happen. In this case, I hope to call for adoption in January. The second part of your question is different than just adoption. While I expect the WG to review the documents when adopted, I will ask the authors of draft-jiang-spring-sr-policy-nrp to review your analysis. Others in the WG have also been involved in the different WGs and can contribute. Thanks! Alvaro.
- [Idr] Issue raised in RTG-DIR review of draft-iet… Susan Hares
- [Idr] Re: [Pce] Issue raised in RTG-DIR review of… Alvaro Retana
- [Idr] Re: Issue raised in RTG-DIR review of draft… Susan Hares
- [Idr] Re: Issue raised in RTG-DIR review of draft… Susan Hares