[mpls] Consensus call on draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-only-gap

Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu> Thu, 28 August 2014 21:11 UTC

Return-Path: <loa@pi.nu>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CBAE1A2130 for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 14:11:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.568
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.568 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6g1KUJKKqbQS for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 14:11:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu []) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 162A01A0B7F for <mpls@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 14:11:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] (81-236-221-144-no93.tbcn.telia.com []) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B903D18013DA; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 23:11:27 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <53FF9B03.7010300@pi.nu>
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 23:11:31 +0200
From: Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.2; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/6MFBhZAP7fO853koJTXJSar3Qvw
Cc: "<mpls-ads@tools.ietf.org>" <mpls-ads@tools.ietf.org>, "mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: [mpls] Consensus call on draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-only-gap
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 21:11:36 -0000

Working Group,

draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-only-gap has been been through working group last, 
with only supportive comments.

We also had a Routing Area Directorate review that also did not bring
up any major technical points. However a few points were brought up,
such as

- this is a very important document, but since is a gap analysis it is
   also only document what is true at a certain point time, and the
   half-life of the document will be fairly short and it doubtful if
   there is value publishing it as an RFC.

- There have also be been some ideas that we should move pointers
   pointers to an appendix or remove them entirely. In order to avoid
   mandating certain solutions before the become working group work

The working group chairs find that the working group have consensus to 
move ahead with the document (version -02) as it has been updated after
the wglc and reviews.

The value in having  the document publish by far outweigh not having it
published. The benefits in moving the reference to an appendix (or
removing them) is not comparable to have easily at hand when reading
the document.

However, once we have this document published as an RFC we understand 
that keeping on updating an RFC is hardly possible to follow the
closing of the gaps. The working group chairs will address this issue
once the RFC has been published.

for the working group chairs


Loa Andersson                        email: loa@mail01.huawei.com
Senior MPLS Expert                          loa@pi.nu
Huawei Technologies (consultant)     phone: +46 739 81 21 64