Re: [Lsr] 【Request AD Step In】 Working Group Adoption of "IGP Unreachable Prefix Announcement" - draft-ppsenak-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce-04

Acee Lindem <acee.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 14 September 2023 20:49 UTC

Return-Path: <acee.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: lsr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lsr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0158C15152E; Thu, 14 Sep 2023 13:49:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.106
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.106 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 tkI8FDP78Xjd; Thu, 14 Sep 2023 13:49:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk1-x72c.google.com (mail-qk1-x72c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72c]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AE101C151538; Thu, 14 Sep 2023 13:49:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk1-x72c.google.com with SMTP id af79cd13be357-770ef1f4513so89766885a.1; Thu, 14 Sep 2023 13:49:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1694724576; x=1695329376; darn=ietf.org; h=to:references:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:cc:date :in-reply-to:from:subject:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=ChSu8qj9lISVCTpjT9ymVV3i6EfBEGKf9++GphNmxWM=; b=N+TsjY+JaJgZ3Snu4qx6QbNrHBtJAIVrVPBsVMDhnHx+LnrEoN4hCHdLxt1gpMheTN 6R+lQKfmKSsdVevrkpNJ7zdTZen2ajnhCfm/WGK1EpVii10NGzYnjTiIlI56UlCGlqLo L/vIQCR5RtmB9Zd2ay+090/frcFcnDrxwesvsHQNUqWK7laIVwBhICgSsRgnr+C6XR0+ BQJdiyp5L9shtflR4bqPKSi1YSYcrWjmz85KaptZaKVgalqUYijKNO6tWVmRka0g9pCs t1DTB4iGchYMakERC8+A9Th/n9zZvW48kQAt9dYyq3tHnTbgmkgOMFuc+VH1oc6BkQpp VKiA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1694724576; x=1695329376; h=to:references:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:cc:date :in-reply-to:from:subject:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=ChSu8qj9lISVCTpjT9ymVV3i6EfBEGKf9++GphNmxWM=; b=ppEnudS8pza+1IKkTWr857oUIC6xV3SeUAKBl1JCzdOJZXkRn8cq4GiBigHKWmNEYW PPnaWnIkkPkpn8zoToojV8Tja7GPjzU8GZsJ/Rsu9X9CVHCoChc4kHA/iJ0dadGeQ6Nw 8H8tsflV92Xj4rs0km6sCJVAAyfwsgQcARmyxBxIYuB5+YU3SpgBVU16d/TphvO7z7lV iGdfcIaWzOSatCMvjsqlLTke+gZKQ8X/ung88ZI1MEGDh+FqYx04LJNj6Y0yKKP/++Ql RbpMNc8G/sEvHvuxMgqBeTDD863rsYxXyb9yF39QNFWj7+67co5nwWBjBW51jc5/GbG8 QIpg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyOd3tNB1sgJIUCJ8F+7FzP1sJ5oKXV0BW1UUJV91VBJJI+kZdu nu11x3dm0OysqJZ6OfbZ2Yg=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGIFtkWTfnYVyIF4i6grfszyN8QOlrRjJATEuzvJyHXrgCaMH+NjaDngcvXyloh3RfpxmoWfA==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:290a:b0:767:923:48e7 with SMTP id m10-20020a05620a290a00b00767092348e7mr8772874qkp.5.1694724575732; Thu, 14 Sep 2023 13:49:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple ([2605:a601:9199:bf00:e5f5:8003:6aee:421f]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p1-20020a05620a112100b0076ca9f79e1fsm727961qkk.46.2023.09.14.13.49.35 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 14 Sep 2023 13:49:35 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3731.700.6\))
From: Acee Lindem <acee.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <6D5172BB-DA74-4457-A835-0BCBBA085F5A@juniper.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2023 16:49:24 -0400
Cc: Aijun Wang <wangaijun@tsinghua.org.cn>, lsr <lsr@ietf.org>, "draft-ppsenak-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce@ietf.org" <draft-ppsenak-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce@ietf.org>, tom petch <ietfc@btconnect.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <70900BC8-4AF6-40C6-9366-2BF6EE695160@gmail.com>
References: <28D58B1F-527C-4F8A-BD18-B74D5965FD14@gmail.com> <AE20A7EE-FA6F-4F19-93CA-1EE495025066@tsinghua.org.cn> <GVXPR07MB97282E0DBC3AB95558786E45A0F7A@GVXPR07MB9728.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <6D5172BB-DA74-4457-A835-0BCBBA085F5A@juniper.net>
To: John Scudder <jgs=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3731.700.6)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/L6OWuVUaAcOh0RrQh2pCJxCiYBA>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] 【Request AD Step In】 Working Group Adoption of "IGP Unreachable Prefix Announcement" - draft-ppsenak-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce-04
X-BeenThere: lsr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Link State Routing Working Group <lsr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lsr>, <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lsr/>
List-Post: <mailto:lsr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr>, <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2023 20:49:40 -0000


> On Sep 14, 2023, at 16:01, John Scudder <jgs=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> Tom is right of course, and thank you for pointing it out. (The specific section in RFC 2026 to look at is 6.5.1.)
> 
> In the meantime, I’ll review the mailing list discussion. However, the most desirable outcome would be to settle things at the WG level without further escalation.

There were attempts to merge the drafts but the solutions and use cases are different. The WG group consensus was to adopt the technical solution in the WG document and it has significant momentum. The draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement solution purports to solve more use cases and could be discussed independently. I consider this closed. 

Thanks,
Acee

> 
> —John
> 
>> On Sep 14, 2023, at 12:25 PM, tom petch <ietfc@btconnect.com> wrote:
>> 
>> From: Lsr <lsr-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Aijun Wang <wangaijun@tsinghua.org.cn>
>> Sent: 14 September 2023 11:38
>> 
>> Hi, Acee:
>> 
>> I admire your efforts for the LSR WG, but for the adoption call of this draft, you have not convinced me, although I gave you large amount of solid facts.
>> Then, it's time to let our AD to step in, to make the non-biased judgement, based on our discussions along the adoption call.
>> 
>> <tp>
>> 
>> I think that what you have in mind is an appeal, as per RFC2026.
>> 
>> The first stage therein is to involve the Chairs, and while Acee is one, he is not the only one.
>> 
>> Have you involved the other Chair, on or off list? That would seem to me to be next step.
>> 
>> Tom Petch
>> 
>> 
>> We request the WG document be based on the https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!FBaOZ68azDC2Puoe7BZVn9qBD-T-BvvJIoPE539Fz7ZmoBeBkYkjEH4eFsk7HxvaaacJE5KWnyE3KA$ , because it is the first document to initiate the use case, provide the explicit signaling mechanism, and cover more scenarios.
>> 
>> It’s unreasonable to adopt the follower solution and ignore the initiator. We started and lead the discussions THREE years earlier than the current proposal.
>> 
>> Aijun Wang
>> China Telecom
>> 
>>> On Sep 8, 2023, at 23:16, Acee Lindem <acee.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> The WG adoption call has completed and there is more than sufficient support for adoption.
>>> What’s more, vendors are implementing and operators are planning of deploying the extensions.
>>> Please republish the draft as draft-ietf-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce-00.
>>> 
>>> A couple of WG members, while acknowledging the use case, thought that it would be better satisfied outside of the IGPs.
>>> In fact, they both offered other viable alternatives. However, with the overwhelming support and commitment to implementation
>>> and deployment, we are going forward with WG adoption of this document. As the Co-Chair managing the adoption, I don’t see
>>> this optional mechanism as fundamentally changing the IGPs.
>>> 
>>> There was also quite vehement opposition from the authors of draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement. This draft
>>> purports to support the same use case as well as others (the archives can be consulted for the discussion). Further discussion
>>> of this other draft and the use cases it addresses should be in the context of draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement
>>> and not the WG draft.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Acee
>>> 
>>>> On Aug 23, 2023, at 3:58 PM, Acee Lindem <acee.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> LSR Working Group,
>>>> 
>>>> This begins the working group adoption call for “IGP Unreachable Prefix Announcement” - draft-ppsenak-lsr-igp-unreach-prefix-announce-04.
>>>> Please indicate your support or objection on this list prior to September 7th, 2023.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Acee
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Lsr mailing list
>>> Lsr@ietf.org
>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!FBaOZ68azDC2Puoe7BZVn9qBD-T-BvvJIoPE539Fz7ZmoBeBkYkjEH4eFsk7HxvaaacJE5IDNwDbvQ$
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lsr mailing list
>> Lsr@ietf.org
>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!FBaOZ68azDC2Puoe7BZVn9qBD-T-BvvJIoPE539Fz7ZmoBeBkYkjEH4eFsk7HxvaaacJE5IDNwDbvQ$
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Lsr mailing list
> Lsr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr