IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to adopt draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis as a wg doc

Nadeau Thomas <tnadeau@lucidvision.com> Sat, 19 December 2015 13:49 UTC

Return-Path: <tnadeau@lucidvision.com>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83DB11A89AF; Sat, 19 Dec 2015 05:49:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.011
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.011 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wNB0WcqANKma; Sat, 19 Dec 2015 05:49:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lucidvision.com (lucidvision.com [64.71.170.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C1BA21A89A9; Sat, 19 Dec 2015 05:49:21 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lucidvision.com; s=default; t=1450532931; bh=o2hn3l6HqjqGTXKH8sJ4VXclP3GWqJVN74cFkxq6LEY=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=DFjh9nEQv5xZwN2QXNAxNsWequgeDmXIoGsg2KYXudUtKywHPpdoS5/0rhCGnKU+H 9fln1FVXqPjCIkBupaKpZ8UjVlhjcCz2fwfgUB54KtjWelmR12xGkJgB7hRz0ObN0l tsQ2IpAO1FkwPHp7KXIYkh+HDyVbyZXIFZ8o7+Z4=
X-Default-Received-SPF: pass (skip=loggedin (res=PASS)) x-ip-name=50.255.148.181;
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_6F5EF28C-89D3-44C2-8612-4F8750C8C888"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.1 \(3096.5\))
From: Nadeau Thomas <tnadeau@lucidvision.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAA=duU31RgnrGV4G9O1MJoS0LqeeXn-SnGMZdWFQ4id_ZpN_TA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2015 08:48:47 -0500
Message-Id: <E683869A-7A24-4D70-B5A5-ECDF7DC73FB2@lucidvision.com>
References: <5674E8EF.80807@pi.nu> <061FEE8B-A140-47C7-9115-A1F7607BAD47@gmail.com> <CAA=duU31RgnrGV4G9O1MJoS0LqeeXn-SnGMZdWFQ4id_ZpN_TA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3096.5)
X-Authenticated-User: tnadeau@lucidvision.com
X-Info: aspam skipped due to (g_smite_skip_relay)
X-Encryption: SSL encrypted
X-MyRbl: Color=Yellow Age=0 Spam=0 Notspam=1 Stars=0 Good=0 Friend=0 Surbl=0 Catch=0 r=0 ip=50.255.148.181
X-IP-stats: Notspam Incoming Last 0, First 218, in=2919, out=0, spam=0 Known=true ip=50.255.148.181
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/4x5X8-9Rw2HvZ2SqOXWzfKVjKtw>
Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" <mpls-chairs@ietf.org>, "draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis@ietf.org" <draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to adopt draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis as a wg doc
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mpls/>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2015 13:49:23 -0000

	Wouldn’t that make sense to move forward to Full Standard too?

	—Tom

> On Dec 19, 2015:8:44 AM, at 8:44 AM, Andrew G. Malis <agmalis@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Absolutely, it’s overdue for MPLS OAM and LSP Ping to be a full Standard.
> 
> Cheers,
> Andy
> 
> 
> On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 12:53 AM, Sam Aldrin <aldrin.ietf@gmail.com <mailto:aldrin.ietf@gmail.com>> wrote:
> Strong Yes for adoption.
> Lot of enhancements went it, via various RFC’s, which makes RFC4379 an incomplete document for MPLS OAM.
> Hence this bis is very much essential and long overdue.
> 
> -sam
> > On Dec 18, 2015, at 9:19 PM, Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu <mailto:loa@pi.nu>> wrote:
> >
> > Working Group,
> >
> > This is to start a three week (because of the holiday season) poll
> > to see if we have consensus to adopt draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis
> > as an MPLS working group document.
> >
> > Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working
> > group mailing list (mpls@ietf.org <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>). Please give a technical
> > motivation for your support/not support, especially if you think that
> > the document should not be adopted as a working group document.
> >
> > There are no IPR disclosures directly against draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis document. However, there are IPR disclosures against
> > RFC 4379.
> >
> > We have started an IPR poll in parallel to the adoption poll.
> >
> > The document shepherd and working group chairs are frequently asked
> > about the working group discussions related to any IPR disclosures.
> >
> > We like to remind the working group that discussion on the content
> > and validity of an IPR disclosure should not take place on the
> > MPLS wg list or any IETF mailing lists.
> >
> > However we are looking for simple statements whether you think the
> > working group should continue progress the document, regardless of
> > an existing IPR disclosure. Please include this information in your
> > 'support/do not support' when responding to working group adoption
> > calls and last calls.
> >
> > This working group adoptiom poll ends January 8, 2016.
> >
> > /Loa
> > --
> >
> >
> > Loa Andersson                        email: loa@mail01.huawei.com <mailto:loa@mail01.huawei.com>
> > Senior MPLS Expert                          loa@pi.nu <mailto:loa@pi.nu>
> > Huawei Technologies (consultant)     phone: +46 739 81 21 64 <tel:%2B46%20739%2081%2021%2064>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@ietf.org <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email