Re: [Isis-wg] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-isis-l2bundles-05: (with COMMENT)

Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com> Wed, 24 May 2017 21:08 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <149565973711.8685.11434741509294820341.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <149565973711.8685.11434741509294820341.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
From: Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 May 2017 17:08:10 -0400
Message-ID: <CAG4d1rfjAuREGTgqpjWkpBcJgYQ2Mp3nd_Y=js3sNUcPkXhHDA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, Hannes Gredler <hannes@gredler.at>, "isis-wg@ietf.org" <isis-wg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-isis-l2bundles@ietf.org, isis-chairs@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c0d9ed6701e9f05504b8052"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/isis-wg/6fqR5jXZAq3IKMrcIaLITKwqCpc>
Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-isis-l2bundles-05: (with COMMENT)
Precedence: list

On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 5:02 PM, Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com> wrote:

> Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-isis-l2bundles-05: No Objection
>
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
>
>
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>
>
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-isis-l2bundles/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I support the various DISCUSS points concerning the security
> considerations.
>
> I note that the remaining authors have made their IPR statements, so that
> discussion is moot.
>
> I share some of the discomfort concerning the shepherd report. I'm
> willing to accept that the shepherd is in the rough, but it would be nice
> to have stronger evidence of that, perhaps in the form of an opinion from
> the other chair. To quote a wise area director: I leave it to the
> responsible AD to do the right thing, whatever that might be.


Ben,

Thanks.    The formal minutes from IETF 98 on IS-IS include:

"- Intro, Adminastriva, Document Status - Chris Hopps (See slides)
    Alia Atlas: Some discussions surrounding using
                 IS-IS for link-bundles.
     Chris Hopps: Draft has been WG document for months and
            months. Why are there questions now?
     Alia: Requires further discussion. Need to notify
           RTG WG and OSPF WG.
     Les: What is the progression of this document. Past
          WG last call since June. What is timeline?
     Alia: Wasn't completely aware of timeline and will
           do another AD review. Assuming no major concerns
           during IETF last call it could go to IESG telechat
           in May.
     Peter Lothberg: This is holding up required IS-IS protocol
           deployment.
"

This is a cleaned up version of what I recall being said - which included
Chris
Hopps, the other ISIS WG Chair, clearly stating that the draft had WG
consensus.
I regret that that wasn't captured in the formal minutes, but it should be
at the start
of the recording.

Regards,
Alia

[Isis-wg] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ie… Ben Campbell
Re: [Isis-wg] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draf… Alia Atlas