Re: Adoption Call for "The IPv6 Compact Routing Header (CRH)"

[Greg Mirsky <[e-mail]>]

Sorry, I've meant "Zafar and I are working together".

Regards,
Greg

On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 1:24 PM Greg Mirsky <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi Darren,
> I'm confused by what I think is a suggestion that any work on OAM relevant
> to an IPv6 EH does not belong in 6man WG. If that is what you've suggested,
> then what about draft-ietf-6man-spring-srv6-oam, which is in WGLC, and Ali
> and I are working to resolve comments? Are you suggesting that we should
> stop the authors of that draft find a different WG to anchor or hold the
> BoF? I'm puzzled.
>
> Regards,
> Greg
>
> On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 7:00 AM Darren Dukes (ddukes) <ddukes=
> [e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> Hi Bob and Ole.
>>
>> I’m not supporting the draft for adoption by 6man. I know you’re shocked
>> ;).
>>
>> I have one main concern with 6man adoption that I think many can agree
>> with.
>>
>> This draft will require substantial work related to the 16/32bit
>> identifier (CP and OAM) that is not ipv6 nor ipv6 maintenance and for which
>> this working group does not have a mandate nor, traditionally, expertise to
>> drive.
>>
>> Others have said “this is not 6man’s concern” and I agree because 6man is
>> an ipv6 maintenance WG, not the segment mapping working group.  I believe
>> the authors should find a WG with that concern to drive this work. I know
>> starting work without requirements is fun and exciting, but you will likely
>> end up at the wrong destination.
>>
>> Brian had one suggestion on this topic.
>>
>> In the past I’ve suggested SPRING, or if the authors desire, a BOF to
>> build consensus and gather requirements for its parent SRm6 work or some
>> variant of it.
>>
>> I hope the authors, WG, chairs and AD consider these points during this
>> adoption call.
>>
>> Thanks
>>   Darren
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From:* ipv6 <[e-mail]> on behalf of Bob Hinden <
>> [e-mail]>
>> *Sent:* Friday, May 15, 2020 6:14 PM
>> *To:* IPv6 List
>> *Cc:* Bob Hinden
>> *Subject:* Adoption Call for "The IPv6 Compact Routing Header (CRH)"
>>
>> This message starts a two-week 6MAN call on adopting:
>>
>>  Title:          The IPv6 Compact Routing Header (CRH)
>>  Authors:        R. Bonica, Y. Kamite, T. Niwa, A. Alston, L. Jalil
>>  File Name:      draft-bonica-6man-comp-rtg-hdr-21
>>  Document date:  2020-05-14
>>
>>  https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bonica-6man-comp-rtg-hdr
>>
>> as a working group item. Substantive comments regarding adopting this
>> document should be directed to the mailing list.  Editorial suggestions can
>> be sent to the authors.
>>
>> Please note that this is an adoption call, it is not a w.g. last call for
>> advancement, adoption means that it will become a w.g. draft.  As the
>> working group document, the w.g. will decide how the document should change
>> going forward.
>>
>> This adoption call will end on 29 May 2020.
>>
>> The chairs note there has been a lot of discussions on the list about
>> this draft.   After discussing with our area directors, we think it is
>> appropriate to start a working group adoption call.  The authors have been
>> active in resolving issues raised on the list.
>>
>> Could those who are willing to work on this document, either as
>> contributors, authors or reviewers please notify the list.   That gives us
>> an indication of the energy level in the working group
>> to work on this.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Bob and Ole
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>