[lisp] Moving draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding to standard track?

Hi All,

Happy new year! 

As you may have seen from Alberto’s shepherd review of the name encoding document, it is suggested to move the document to standard track.

Jim Guichard (our AD) is OK as long as the WG is OK with this change and that deployment experience is added to the document.

Hence, this email opens a two weeks call to check if you agree with the change.

Please reply to this email stating whether you are in favor or you are against.
(Silence does not count)

Please reply.

Ciao

L.

> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> From: "Alberto Rodriguez-Natal \(natal\)" <natal=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
> Subject: [lisp] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding
> Date: December 28, 2023 at 12:00:33 GMT+1
> To: "lisp@ietf.org" <lisp@ietf.org>
> 
> Hi all,
>  
> The shepherd’s review of the LISP Distinguished Name Encoding has been posted. The document is in good shape and minor identified nits have been fixed. Please find the review here:
>  
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding/shepherdwriteup/
>  
> However, as part of the review, it was raised the question if the document is in the right stream (currently in Experimental). Given that there are known implementations of the spec and that it has been running in production for some time, my suggestion is to consider moving this document to Standards track instead.
>  
> Thanks,
> Alberto
> _______________________________________________
> lisp mailing list
> lisp@ietf.org <mailto:lisp@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp