IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: Late IPR Disclosure regarding draft-ietf-6man-ipv6-alt-mark

Giuseppe Fioccola <giuseppe.fioccola@huawei.com> Fri, 01 July 2022 07:49 UTC

Return-Path: <giuseppe.fioccola@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 395E8C15CF4A for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Jul 2022 00:49:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.906
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.906 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-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, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] 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 g0ignk9Hp9ho for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Jul 2022 00:49:37 -0700 (PDT)
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 C6BB7C14CF03 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Jul 2022 00:49:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fraeml711-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.147.226]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4LZ6gZ25yDz67xgN; Fri, 1 Jul 2022 15:45:30 +0800 (CST)
Received: from fraeml714-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.33) by fraeml711-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.60) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2375.24; Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:49:35 +0200
Received: from fraeml714-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.206.15.33]) by fraeml714-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.206.15.33]) with mapi id 15.01.2375.024; Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:49:35 +0200
From: Giuseppe Fioccola <giuseppe.fioccola@huawei.com>
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, Giuseppe Fioccola <giuseppe.fioccola=40huawei.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
CC: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: Late IPR Disclosure regarding draft-ietf-6man-ipv6-alt-mark
Thread-Topic: Late IPR Disclosure regarding draft-ietf-6man-ipv6-alt-mark
Thread-Index: AQHYjKEcrWwAVWlOOUGkwcfrD7mANK1oDMSAgAAtUbCAACvzgIAAoYMw///xxACAACX0oA==
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2022 07:49:35 +0000
Message-ID: <4a58da03fcda4255ac3894bd8e4d5c20@huawei.com>
References: <8E1527F0-5D03-432D-8077-8022801A28E3@gmail.com> <b97b96f0-3fc8-78b4-f434-7a1da0654e35@gont.com.ar> <182b7608c4eb432b839f2654bfa12a62@huawei.com> <86ca671b-36b9-7b04-b244-82bd518a7240@si6networks.com> <e3e1d7a904f345ddab2f5f573463bf5f@huawei.com> <F91B03F6-097F-4009-8CAE-926BBF9CFA98@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <F91B03F6-097F-4009-8CAE-926BBF9CFA98@tzi.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.81.215.225]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/iVIe9LCVMQW4XpLPcuerlLk3dC4>
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: Fri, 01 Jul 2022 07:49:39 -0000

Hi Carsten,
Thanks a lot for sharing your opinion.
I also agree that the approach of RFC 9197 makes sense and can be followed in this draft. In fact, Alternate Marking and IOAM are both on-path telemetry techniques.

Regards,

Giuseppe

-----Original Message-----
From: ipv6 <ipv6-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Carsten Bormann
Sent: Friday, July 1, 2022 9:13 AM
To: Giuseppe Fioccola <giuseppe.fioccola=40huawei.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>; Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>; Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>; IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Late IPR Disclosure regarding draft-ietf-6man-ipv6-alt-mark 

On 2022-07-01, at 09:01, Giuseppe Fioccola <giuseppe.fioccola=40huawei.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> I think it is correct to mention RFC 8799 as a document to read as it is done in RFC 9197 as well.

RFC 9197 demonstrates an interesting use case for an informative reference:
Terminology from 8799 is used to define terminology in 9197 that is then used in a normative way.
There are probably limits to this kind of up-ratcheting, but it strikes me as entirely appropriate in 9197.
(I normally try to turn terminology references into normative ones, except for informational sources, such as RFC 7228.)

Grüße, Carsten

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email