[ippm] Next step for STAMP Extensions
Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com> Tue, 19 May 2020 15:50 UTC
Return-Path: <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C91983A098B; Tue, 19 May 2020 08:50:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.118
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.118 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_BL=1.979, 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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 gxh4Mdu4LMOL; Tue, 19 May 2020 08:50:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x232.google.com (mail-lj1-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 571883A088C; Tue, 19 May 2020 08:50:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x232.google.com with SMTP id g1so236585ljk.7; Tue, 19 May 2020 08:50:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=OaMn/M7M7X0qr0cMILcdx7iL5rIdX5IglaTx7sj8eJ8=; b=XMVWJ/XsVGkm3yb5+coLqPYQsG2WSwVZLbleyEmfrgYxhLMsEN2V1H0ZLyzA5EGfzg 4x5sK5o5kGk4+7QsZ4HrZVlpnUKU3PExIatqAGlAlagJmjJFcZO0qU5DuP0uif1pFhui aWt9f3Q0U2q0nBA9WXRaZrYsTVqSBvKoQfHEUto02mAK9kf5XCR4s5onwLQj57AHswWX b4BzN6dqKatyzG5r+NGMa8W4W2r1Q4+CZPCf5J1APSXi6bksrP+rhUJzWgh5sY52EPMx XrYBeNwl4sRFSToDVk/UF/OxYBf9g2ZfdoNhVJ/pQtzRLC5jbLEq9sI7QekxzkncMMok ms8A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=OaMn/M7M7X0qr0cMILcdx7iL5rIdX5IglaTx7sj8eJ8=; b=TwytMGjeK0Z3fh5eKD/x08MVHghCYGMp2n/ZcMcHd+h4Z2V+6DXtiJdiLU18/8wE6S IT5H4YXOr9Z48mVTZ60iU2HR43fwS6XUje1IgPPn6mHtppMu0SX2odYtZNv+lvN6UmwZ 2oK/SULB61FkmVYHglgAVy5APFPfrS1PGZEw0lzLNmUf8ky1xOJEdOhE+sj/7gHu+SQ0 Vx4Vsc9FlJMGNpp8LWsueK746O3KwK+xHTcfzvObilTpnYLjQJaIQotLc2xkjf+V7ngn my+/uLMwRb6qixz9xcMCDmWu6hQtOSlG4W77umWxXXGFplZuV9+IX344xIwdcA05Ro8B TObw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532TlvqZiHue1sU/3b38oXmqYvxVCoOWYouatEy7SC+Wr7nDD0Cr zi6mLdD+YxAKGhA1wjivf60n+1UG4OLP+iyTJqUKwFkx9RA=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxGKYJLOkSmC32BFh/DNpx2GgELETykh4rscDDmjP4qvdbsD6lb0nbaB+rDbWxvo0ZSOrQtLOuGHVhKZRr8vJI=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:651c:1211:: with SMTP id i17mr71386lja.56.1589903421965; Tue, 19 May 2020 08:50:21 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 May 2020 08:50:10 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+RyBmVpv5-ec0jh9CXRvazoqqHbyTm+iHBTbYTJhZ_Qq2kymQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: IPPM Chairs <ippm-chairs@ietf.org>, IETF IPPM WG <ippm@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b18d3405a6023cf6"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/_1pKJNNmMtELapzA8LBWrLVzaxQ>
Subject: [ippm] Next step for STAMP Extensions
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: Tue, 19 May 2020 15:50:26 -0000
Dear Tommy and Ian, during the presentation of recent updates to the STAMP Extensions draft ( draft-ietf-ippm-stamp-option-tlv <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ippm-stamp-option-tlv/>) at the IPPM WG interim meeting, I had mentioned that the authors believe that the document is ready for the WG LC. In the view of the authors, the document has been stable and defines a set of useful extensions to STAMP. We much appreciate your consideration of starting the WG LC on the draft-ietf-ippm-stamp-option-tlv. Best regards, Greg
- [ippm] Next step for STAMP Extensions Greg Mirsky