IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Int-area] Call for adoption of draft-xu-intarea-ip-in-udp-03

Xuxiaohu <xuxiaohu@huawei.com> Mon, 30 May 2016 10:09 UTC

Return-Path: <xuxiaohu@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E4BB12D1CA for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 May 2016 03:09:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.646
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.646 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 0UCEm6sNqDTw for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 May 2016 03:09:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 19A1712D188 for <int-area@ietf.org>; Mon, 30 May 2016 03:09:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml707-cah.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id CPV49009; Mon, 30 May 2016 10:09:17 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from NKGEML411-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.70) by lhreml707-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.199) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Mon, 30 May 2016 11:09:16 +0100
Received: from NKGEML515-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.5.169]) by nkgeml411-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.70]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Mon, 30 May 2016 18:09:12 +0800
From: Xuxiaohu <xuxiaohu@huawei.com>
To: "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" <cpignata@cisco.com>, Wassim Haddad <wassim.haddad@ericsson.com>
Thread-Topic: [Int-area] Call for adoption of draft-xu-intarea-ip-in-udp-03
Thread-Index: AQHRuO4WYc53YeR+cUaXFBMassyEYJ/RQlBg
Date: Mon, 30 May 2016 10:09:12 +0000
Message-ID: <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0D559DD9@NKGEML515-MBS.china.huawei.com>
References: <E83B905A-FF6D-4996-B71A-7921DE4B133B@ericsson.com> <E0689912-B269-4769-9A2C-223F4DEEC7E1@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <E0689912-B269-4769-9A2C-223F4DEEC7E1@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.111.99.55]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0D559DD9NKGEML515MBSchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A020203.574C114D.01A6, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=169.254.5.169, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 98f501930a9acad9667238de40565439
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/u56spuJmzQeYADa7MecvNhl8t-s>
Cc: "int-area@ietf.org" <int-area@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] Call for adoption of draft-xu-intarea-ip-in-udp-03
X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List <int-area.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/int-area/>
List-Post: <mailto:int-area@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 30 May 2016 10:09:24 -0000

Carlos

From: Int-area [mailto:int-area-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)
Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2016 10:34 PM
To: Wassim Haddad
Cc: int-area@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Int-area] Call for adoption of draft-xu-intarea-ip-in-udp-03

Wasim, Juan Carlos,

Back to your original request, I do not support adoption of draft-xu-intarea-ip-in-udp. I also did not support draft-xu-softwire-ip-in-udp.

I do not believe there’s a case for this new tunnel type. I also believe that a deeper look at the potential problem space can yield better solutions, as opposed to a solution looking for a problem.

The problem associated with the LB approach as proposed in [RFC5640<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5640>] is obvious. In other words, there is no need for looking for at all. With regard to whether or not the IP-in-UDP encapsulation is the best solution to that problem, it is another thing.

Xiaohu


Thanks,

— Carlos Pignataro.


On May 19, 2016, at 1:03 PM, Wassim Haddad <wassim.haddad@ericsson.com<mailto:wassim.haddad@ericsson.com>> wrote:

Dear all,

The authors of draft-xu-intarea-ip-in-udp-03 (“Encapsulating IP in UDP”) have requested that the working group adopt this work as a WG work item.
So far, WG chairs have not seen widespread support and considering that lack of opposition does not qualify as support, we’re starting a working group adoption call until June 3rd.

If you consider that the draft should be adopted as a WG work item, please indicate the reason.


Regards,

Wassim & Juan Carlos




_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
Int-area@ietf.org<mailto:Int-area@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email