Re: [mpls] Question raised in the MPLS-RT review of draft-rosen-mpls-rfc3107bis

["Acee Lindem (acee)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Loa, et al, 

Since I commented on the MPLS-RT review with respect to the IDR-specific
content, there may be some confusion as to where I stand on the ownership
of this draft. I’ve reviewed this document and agree with the approach
described below. I’m convinced we will get the right level cross-WG review
along as we recognize that it does span multiple WGs. I would expect that
we’ll have implementations conforming to the draft in the near future.

Thanks,
Acee

On 8/17/16, 1:36 PM, "mpls on behalf of Loa Andersson"
<[e-mail] on behalf of [e-mail]> wrote:

>Eric, et.al., (copied also idr-chairs and idr-list + bess-chairs and
>bess-list)
>
>For those of you that are not subscribed to the mpls-list.
>
>- the mpls wg has started the initial steps for working group adoption,
>   there are three steps
>   -- mpls-rt review (what you see below is the follow-up discussion on
>      that review)
>   -- IPR poll, will be sent out soon
>   -- working group adoption poll (wgap), that poll will be copied to
>      the idr and bess. Hopefully we can that shortly.
>
>I'm sending this to mpls, idr and bess working group, since it has
>to do where things should be documented.
>
>
>On 2016-08-17 17:59, Eric C Rosen wrote:
>> Hi Mach,
>>
>> Thanks for your review.
>>
>> On 8/3/2016 4:51 AM, Mach Chen wrote:
>>> I have only one comment regarding to Section 5. IMHO, although it's
>>> informational, the description about the relationship between SAFI-1
>>> and SAFI-4 routes should not belong to this document, it's a more
>>> common description that is not specific to this label binding process.
>>> I'd suggest to remove this section if there is no any other reasons.
>>
>> Differing interpretations about the relationship between SAFI-1 and
>> SAFI-4 are a very common source of interoperability problems among
>> implementations of different vendors.  Thus I think it is very useful to
>> document this issue and to call attention to some of the differing
>> interpretations.  I think this document is an appropriate place for this
>> information; even though this information is not about label binding, it
>> is about the semantics of SAFI-4.
>
>I agree that this needs to be documented! I can accept that it is done
>in draft-rosen-mpls-rfc3107bis, but I would like to have all three wg's
>agree to this. I see a few alternatives
>
>- we could document this is in draft-rosen-mpls-rfc3107bis; or
>- we could write a separate document
>- we could find another document where this has a better fit than in
>   draft-rosen-mpls-rfc3107bis
>- any other suggestion
>
>Let us know if you have an opinion.
>
>Please send your responses to the mpls wg mailing list ([e-mail]).
>
>/Loa
>mpls wg-co-chair
>
>>
>> Eric
>
>-- 
>
>
>Loa Andersson                        email: [e-mail]
>Senior MPLS Expert                          [e-mail]
>Huawei Technologies (consultant)     phone: [phone]
>
>_______________________________________________
>mpls mailing list
>[e-mail]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls