Re: [ippm] Merging deployment considerations into IPv6 IOAM document

["Frank Brockners (fbrockne)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Tommy,

Thanks for your feedback. Here's the git link:
https://github.com/inband-oam/ietf/blob/master/drafts/draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-ipv6-options.xml
Text version is here: https://github.com/inband-oam/ietf/blob/master/drafts/versions/03/draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-ipv6-options-03.txt

Looking forward to your comments.

Thanks, Frank

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tommy Pauly <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Dienstag, 29. September 2020 20:19
> To: Frank Brockners (fbrockne) <[e-mail]>
> Cc: [e-mail]; draft-ioametal-ippm-6man-
> [e-mail]; IPPM Chairs <[e-mail]>; Martin
> Duke <[e-mail]>; IETF IPPM WG ([e-mail])
> <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Re: Merging deployment considerations into IPv6 IOAM document
> 
> Hi Frank, all,
> 
> Thanks for providing this update. The combined document makes sense and, I
> believe, will provide a more useful resource to implementors.
> 
> Looking through the new text, I had a few textual/editorial nits. Is this available
> on a GitHub for comments or a PR?
> 
> Thanks,
> Tommy
> 
> > On Sep 18, 2020, at 1:56 AM, Frank Brockners (fbrockne)
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Tommy, IPPM WG,
> >
> > we just posted an updated draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-ipv6-options-03 which merges
> draft-ioametal-ippm-6man-ioam-ipv6-deployment into draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-
> ipv6-options plus it reflects the WG discussion of the last IPPM meeting.
> >
> > The updates to draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-ipv6-options-03 are
> >
> > * implement the guidance from the WG chairs: Merge in draft-ioametal-ippm-
> 6man-ioam-ipv6-deployment "as is", i.e. only editorial changes were made (e.g.
> resolve references which would have been circular).
> > * implement the result of discussion in the last WG meeting: Removed the
> paragraph that started with " In order for IOAM to work in IPv6 networks.."
> which included deployment considerations.
> >
> > Moving forward, we'll need to further evolve the deployment section (now
> section 4).
> > There were already comments raised in the IOAM DT wrt/ what is now section
> 4.4.1 by Haoyu. I asked  Haoyu to take those to the IPPM list.
> >
> > Cheers, Frank
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Tommy Pauly <[e-mail]>
> >> Sent: Freitag, 14. August 2020 23:12
> >> To: [e-mail];
> >> draft-ioametal-ippm-6man- [e-mail]
> >> Cc: IPPM Chairs <[e-mail]>; Martin Duke
> >> <[e-mail]>
> >> Subject: Merging deployment considerations into IPv6 IOAM document
> >>
> >> Hi IOAM IPv6 authors,
> >>
> >> At IETF 108, we discussed draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-ipv6-options and
> >> draft-ioametal- ippm-6man-ioam-ipv6-deployment, and how to progress
> >> with the deployment considerations. Since the hums showed no strong
> >> opinions one way or the other in the WG, Ian and I have discussed and
> >> would prefer to see the deployment considerations merged into the existing
> and adopted IPv6 options document.
> >> Both documents are short, and readers will benefit from any
> >> discussion of deployment being available in the same document that
> >> defines the extension header.
> >>
> >> Please post an update for draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-ipv6-options with this
> >> content added when you have a chance!
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Tommy