Re: [ippm] Adoption call for draft-mizrahi-ippm-ioam-flags Re: Regarding draft-mizrahi-ippm-ioam-flags

Jai Kumar <> Fri, 26 July 2019 15:08 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 342D912007C for <>; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 08:08:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qw7oCTcy4Hiw for <>; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 08:08:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A2D34120044 for <>; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 08:08:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id w10so24930914pgj.7 for <>; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 08:08:09 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=google; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=KwXFjA5K4uS5GMRP5zx/RgIY2GiDNO7fCkJPJcdLvaM=; b=XCRzn2O7qMSMjGwKrJSs7yrDUSffy8z5MTrq0E2jib8UKy833st1xcZvwJdwUjoYgT /V+v1ruZbsv+ThF94tazcopBz7c9Ygd+Lqd+5EHqetX7x5wt9J/OD9LNxFRtSy5brMKV 6zMWhP0Nt40jBLRV+b77m8pX0SgNcJ4N91y7E=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=KwXFjA5K4uS5GMRP5zx/RgIY2GiDNO7fCkJPJcdLvaM=; b=n1OqI97U4yTq0v+7MQVw4YUp/6BTLxrdMVBSMF+MB+28Ed9yV9HghNG+D/Q0YObNSK T4ZyQyoY/+PRTKiiRCQyX8sSTEYr2jutDbDpE904es323V8VxA41aE9XZ2hO8s1Fj6OS x8/jTRXc2OyuU0YbalLliYheDRjCW0LoFgF7HEEnr80jVhxEGML+WQv2n8fP1m/A5wLC 5Aku4GTROmL9spWU7CuFZ1AP5N3YZoOSPVq8lucPXiDJ/u8Ijmvkta1CQrncF/8yT6+r zHUHVKOAjqeTwSAcI8iM4FWLft0whvTi1neUTxEKnQ6CawDGv2ru6bObuf9NQKy8iG9K pNEw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUJV9nZo1ftKfjnXwbZ1vmlWmiR3+c2/C9G0F+01e/laBNJNA9B hPnU5JuT4lWOXvo2SokhwNX5lg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqysNmy7hYFdf/oYt0J+I7y55wXrhDwDaUdwK8PeeA6KbbKZjUnh/rbrp2pzv4AcY0WrtDac0A==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:3086:: with SMTP id h6mr100514551pjb.14.1564153689066; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 08:08:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:641:c080:5dc3:962:2a16:ca0b:f987? ([2601:641:c080:5dc3:962:2a16:ca0b:f987]) by with ESMTPSA id u3sm46525868pjn.5.2019. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 26 Jul 2019 08:08:08 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Jai Kumar <>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (16C104)
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 08:08:07 -0700
Cc: "Brian Trammell (IETF)" <>, Greg Mirsky <>, IPPM Chairs <>, IETF IPPM WG <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <> <> <> <>
To: Tommy Pauly <>
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [ippm] Adoption call for draft-mizrahi-ippm-ioam-flags Re: Regarding draft-mizrahi-ippm-ioam-flags
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 15:08:16 -0000

Thanks Tommy.

Support [as a reviewer]

> On Jul 26, 2019, at 7:11 AM, Tommy Pauly <> wrote:
> Any document adopted by the working group can and will receive edits from the group as a whole. Feel free to send reviews now, but the primary question at hand here is if IPPM as a group believes that the mechanism that this document aims to add is something the group should work on, and that this document is a good starting place for the work.
> Thanks!
> Tommy
>> On Jul 25, 2019, at 4:09 PM, Jai Kumar <> wrote:
>> Hello Chairs,
>> What is the procedure for requesting edits.
>> Can it happen after the adoption call or requests need to be made before.
>> -Jai
>> On 7/25/19, 11:07 AM, "ippm on behalf of Brian Trammell (IETF)" < on behalf of> wrote:
>>   hi Greg,
>>   Thanks for the feedback; absolutely, we can do this the normal way. Authors: let's do a normal two-week adoption call for this document before publishing the update.
>>   This adoption call starts now.
>>   IPPM, please respond to this message with an indication to the mailing list of your support for adopting draft-mizrahi-ippm-ioam-flags as a working group document, in partial fulfillment of our charter milestone "submit a Standards Track draft on inband OAM based measurement methodologies to the IESG" (obviously, depending on how many documents we end up sending to the IESG, we may have to change the plurality of this milestone). If you do not support this, please send a message to the list explaining why.
>>   Thanks, cheers,
>>   Brian (as IPPM co-chair)
>>> On 25 Jul 2019, at 13:15, Greg Mirsky <> wrote:
>>> Dear Chairs, et al.,
>>> I appreciate that editors of draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data followed on the decision of the WG reached at the meeting in Prague to extract material not directly related to the definition of iOAM data elements from the document. The new draft was presented earlier this week and generated many comments. I feel that it would be right to discuss the draft and its relevance to the charter of the IPPM WG before starting WG adoption poll.
>>> Regards,
>>> Greg
>>   _______________________________________________
>>   ippm mailing list