Re: [spring] Request to close the LC and move forward//RE: WGLC - draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming

+1

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 26, 2020, at 9:43 AM, Zafar Ali (zali) <zali=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> +1,
>  
> Just to add, in the spirit of IETF https://www.ietf.org/how/runningcode/ …
> implementation, commercial deployment and Inter-op status has been documented in https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-matsushima-spring-srv6-deployment-status/
>  
> Thanks
>  
> Regards … Zafar
>  
> From: spring <spring-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Lizhenbin <lizhenbin@huawei.com>
> Date: Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 6:55 AM
> To: "bruno.decraene@orange.com" <bruno.decraene@orange.com>, 'SPRING WG List' <spring@ietf.org>
> Cc: "6man@ietf.org" <6man@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming <draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming@ietf.org>
> Subject: [spring] Request to close the LC and move forward//RE: WGLC - draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming
>  
> Hi Bruno and WG,
> The LC has lasted for almost 3 months which greatly exceeds the expected 2 week. In the process all the comments have been resolved while some issues is raised again and again with little value.
> On the other hand, there have been multiple commercial implementation and inter-op test and almost 20 deployments for SRv6 which justify the solution proposed by the draft in practice.
>  
> We sincerely request to close the LC of the draft and move forward.
>  
>  
>  
> Best Regards,
> Zhenbin (Robin)
>  
>  
> From: bruno.decraene@orange.com [mailto:bruno.decraene@orange.com] 
> Sent: Friday, December 06, 2019 1:15 AM
> To: 'SPRING WG List' <spring@ietf.org>
> Cc: 6man@ietf.org; draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming <draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming@ietf.org>
> Subject: WGLC - draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming
>  
> Hello SPRING,
>  
> This email starts a two weeks Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming [1].
>  
> Please read this document if you haven't read the most recent version, and send your comments to the SPRING WG list, no later than December 20.
>  
> You may copy the 6MAN WG for IPv6 related comment, but consider not duplicating emails on the 6MAN mailing list for the comments which are only spring specifics.
>  
> If you are raising a point which you expect will be specifically debated on the mailing list, consider using a specific email/thread for this point.
> This may help avoiding that the thread become specific to this point and that other points get forgotten (or that the thread get converted into parallel independent discussions)
>  
> Thank you,
> Bruno
>  
> [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming-05
>  
>  
> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>  
> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
>  
> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
> Thank you.
> _______________________________________________
> spring mailing list
> spring@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring