[Lsr] Erik Kline's Discuss on draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions-14: (with DISCUSS)

Erik Kline via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Wed, 19 May 2021 01:58 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: lsr@ietf.org
Delivered-To: lsr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4D623A1910; Tue, 18 May 2021 18:58:31 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Erik Kline via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions@ietf.org, lsr-chairs@ietf.org, lsr@ietf.org, Christian Hopps <chopps@chopps.org>, aretana.ietf@gmail.com, chopps@chopps.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.29.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Erik Kline <ek.ietf@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <162138951115.18573.7221386333167039722@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 18 May 2021 18:58:31 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/rjQiKeYCFF-C7dr-eSSl_qHmSJ0>
Subject: [Lsr] Erik Kline's Discuss on draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions-14: (with DISCUSS)
X-BeenThere: lsr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Wed, 19 May 2021 01:58:32 -0000

Erik Kline has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions-14: Discuss

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 DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:


[ section 9 ]

* I share the concerns of several of the others here about SRv6 SIDs being
  claimed to be IPv6 addresses but kinda not really being IPv6 addresses
  if their internal structure is exposed outside of the given SR router.

  If "[i]t's usage is outside of the scope of this document", can this be
  removed for now, and maybe take up the issue at some point in the future
  by which time a motivating use case might have presented itself?