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

"Brian Trammell (IETF)" <ietf@trammell.ch> Thu, 25 July 2019 18:07 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@trammell.ch>
X-Original-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46730120183; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 11:07:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LCxY0iw0UbB9; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 11:07:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-sh.infomaniak.ch (smtp-sh.infomaniak.ch []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E348312018F; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 11:07:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp7.infomaniak.ch (smtp7.infomaniak.ch []) by smtp-sh.infomaniak.ch (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id x6PI7K8n000619 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 25 Jul 2019 20:07:20 +0200
Received: from [IPv6:2001:67c:370:128:e8e7:5f0d:e862:c6d2] ([IPv6:2001:67c:370:128:e8e7:5f0d:e862:c6d2]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp7.infomaniak.ch (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id x6PI7IuE016720 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 25 Jul 2019 20:07:19 +0200
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
From: "Brian Trammell (IETF)" <ietf@trammell.ch>
In-Reply-To: <CA+RyBmVnkMFEQv=Hr3y9OD09+_vocHRgnGQnLwEVO=yuTcptEQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 14:07:18 -0400
Cc: IPPM Chairs <ippm-chairs@ietf.org>, IETF IPPM WG <ippm@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <EAB5C70D-A160-423E-84FE-3CE7AC079168@trammell.ch>
References: <CA+RyBmVnkMFEQv=Hr3y9OD09+_vocHRgnGQnLwEVO=yuTcptEQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
X-Antivirus: Dr.Web (R) for Unix mail servers drweb plugin ver.
X-Antivirus-Code: 0x100000
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/OhmC9oSNcITlPa2-iMN44jhkTk8>
Subject: [ippm] Adoption call for draft-mizrahi-ippm-ioam-flags Re: Regarding draft-mizrahi-ippm-ioam-flags
X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group <ippm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ippm/>
List-Post: <mailto:ippm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 18:07:26 -0000

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 <gregimirsky@gmail.com> 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