Conclusion of 6man w.g. last call for <draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-header-19.txt>

[Bob Hinden <[e-mail]>]

The 6man chairs believe there is a consensus to advance draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-header-21.txt to the IESG to be published as a Proposed Standard.

It’s been a long road to get here.  Two working group last calls, many presentations at 6man IETF sessions, and countless emails on the list.   We think that the current document (-21) is significantly improved based on discussion on the list and resolves the issues raised.   The changes since -19 include:

draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-header-20

 - Updates the mutability text in section 2 as discussed on the list.
 - Changed pad0 to pad1
 - Updates the TLV type registry definition for IANA (pending verification)
 - Changed “SID Type” to “SID”.
 - Changed TLV mutability text to align with RFC8200.

 https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-header-20.txt

draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-header-21

 - Added request to IANA considerations section for ICMP “SR Upper-layer
   Header Error and a request for ICMPv6 Parameter Problem error
   code assignment.
 - Removed reservations of TLV types 3 and 6 for opaque and NSH TLVs based
   on draft-xuclad-spring-sr-service-programming.  That draft requires new
   allocations in the mutable range for TLV types, the authors realized
   the current values won’t be usable any longer.
 - Changed TLV type in IANA Considerations for Type 3 and 6 to Reserved

 https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-header-21

We think the 6MAN consensus is strong to advance, but clearly not unanimous.  

We plan to submit the shepherd's writeup and advance the document in the next few days.  Like all  documents we request for advancement, it will undergo AD review, then an IETF Last call, IESG directorate reviews, and AD reviews, followed by an IESG teleconference ballot.   

We want to thank the 6man working for all of the feedback on this draft and the authors for resolving the issues.

Thanks,
Bob & Ole



> On May 22, 2019, at 6:39 AM, Bob Hinden <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> This message starts a new two week 6MAN Working Group Last Call on advancing:
> 
>       Title           : IPv6 Segment Routing Header (SRH)
>       Authors         : Clarence Filsfils
>                         Darren Dukes
>                         Stefano Previdi
>                         John Leddy
>                         Satoru Matsushima
>                         Daniel Voyer
> 	Filename        : draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-header-19.txt
> 	Pages           : 32
> 	Date            : 2019-05-21
> 
>    https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-header
> 
> as a Proposed Standard.  
> 
> This document was in an extended last call that started in March of 2018.   An issue tracker was set up, and eight new versions of the draft were produced and discussed on the list and at face to face 6man sessions.   All of the issues in the tracker have been closed.  The chairs believe it is ready to advance, but given the number of changes and the time that elapsed, a new w.g. last call is warranted.  Please review the new document.
> 
> Our thanks to the authors/editors and the working group for the work on this document.
> 
> Substantive comments and statements of support for publishing this document should be directed to the mailing list. Editorial suggestions can be sent to the author.  This last call will
> end on 5 June 2019.
> 
> Thanks,
> Bob & Ole
> 
> 
> 
>