IETF Logo Mail Archive

[IPv6] Progress of comments resolution on draft-ietf-6man-enhanced-vpn-vtn-id

"Dongjie (Jimmy)" <jie.dong@huawei.com> Tue, 07 November 2023 16:59 UTC

Return-Path: <jie.dong@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B489EC18E1B7; Tue, 7 Nov 2023 08:59:05 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.906
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.906 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6X4XE3lhdGyb; Tue, 7 Nov 2023 08:59:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 200ABC17DBFA; Tue, 7 Nov 2023 08:59:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lhrpeml500003.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.147.200]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4SPvTG1Khzz6JB4L; Wed, 8 Nov 2023 00:54:42 +0800 (CST)
Received: from dggpemm500008.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.136) by lhrpeml500003.china.huawei.com (7.191.162.67) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2507.31; Tue, 7 Nov 2023 16:58:59 +0000
Received: from kwepemd100004.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.31) by dggpemm500008.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.136) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2507.31; Wed, 8 Nov 2023 00:58:57 +0800
Received: from kwepemd100004.china.huawei.com ([7.221.188.31]) by kwepemd100004.china.huawei.com ([7.221.188.31]) with mapi id 15.02.1258.023; Wed, 8 Nov 2023 00:58:57 +0800
From: "Dongjie (Jimmy)" <jie.dong@huawei.com>
To: 6man <ipv6@ietf.org>
CC: "mohamed.boucadair@orange.com" <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>, "draft-ietf-6man-enhanced-vpn-vtn-id@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-6man-enhanced-vpn-vtn-id@ietf.org>, Lizhenbin <lizhenbin@huawei.com>
Thread-Topic: Progress of comments resolution on draft-ietf-6man-enhanced-vpn-vtn-id
Thread-Index: AdoRm3vXNdYwP6OSTzGuOir3IdlpVw==
Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2023 16:58:56 +0000
Message-ID: <a9ed69b3ac454f9c94a436e98b274d47@huawei.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.48.158.247]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_a9ed69b3ac454f9c94a436e98b274d47huaweicom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/5AoOb4hydd4MgNfuUt27NAOxe0s>
Subject: [IPv6] Progress of comments resolution on draft-ietf-6man-enhanced-vpn-vtn-id
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2023 16:59:05 -0000

Hi WG,

Regarding Med's review comments on draft-ietf-6man-enhanced-vpn-vtn-id, the authors and Med met in Prague and reach some agreement about the possible resolution of his comments.

The proposed approach is to split the definition of the S flag out from this document, so that this document will focus on the specification of the VTN option with all the flags as reserved, and the S Flag could be defined as an extension to the VTN option in a separate document.

Before updating this WG draft, we would like to know the WG's opinion on this approach to move forward. Any feedback is welcome.

Best regards,
Jie

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email