Re: [mpls] working group adoption poll on draft-ninan-mpls-spring-inter-domain-oam

[Shraddha Hegde <[e-mail]>]

Sure Loa. Thanks for reminding.

Rgds
Shraddha


Juniper Business Use Only

-----Original Message-----
From: Loa Andersson <[e-mail]> 
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2021 2:56 PM
To: Shraddha Hegde <[e-mail]>; Dongjie (Jimmy) <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [mpls] working group adoption poll on draft-ninan-mpls-spring-inter-domain-oam

[External Email. Be cautious of content]


Shraddha,

While I agree with the spirit of your statement "I'll address them in next revision" I'll remind you that the -00 version of the wg document is exactly what we used for the wgap, changing only filename and the administrative  information (date and version number).

The changes suggested by Jie should be addressed in version -01 of the wg document.

/Loa

On 2021-11-29 05:25, Shraddha Hegde wrote:
> Jie,
>
> Thank you for the comments.
> I'll address them in next revision.
>
> Rgds
> Shraddha
>
>
> Juniper Business Use Only
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dongjie (Jimmy) <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Monday, November 29, 2021 8:35 AM
> To: Loa Andersson <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
> Cc: [e-mail]; 
> [e-mail]
> Subject: RE: [mpls] working group adoption poll on 
> draft-ninan-mpls-spring-inter-domain-oam
>
> [External Email. Be cautious of content]
>
>
> Hi Loa,
>
> I have read the latest version of this draft and think it provides a useful mechanism, thus I support the adoption.
>
> Here are some comments which may be solved either before or after the adoption.
>
> 1. In several places of this document, it uses "Return Path TLV" to refer to the "Reply Path TLV" defined in RFC 7110. It is suggested to use the consistent term "Reply Path TLV" throughout this document.
>
> 2. Although this document is targeted at Ping & Trace in inter-domain SR-MPLS network scenarios, this mechanism can also be applied to the intra-domain cases where the reply SR path needs to be specified. It would be useful if some text about this could be added to the document.
>
> Best regards,
> Jie
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: mpls [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Loa Andersson
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2021 4:59 PM
>> To: [e-mail]
>> Cc: [e-mail];
>> [e-mail]
>> Subject: [mpls] working group adoption poll on 
>> draft-ninan-mpls-spring-inter-domain-oam
>>
>> Working Group,
>>
>> This is to start a two week poll on adopting
>>
>> draft-ninan-mpls-spring-inter-domain-oam
>>
>> as a MPLS working group document.
>>
>> Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working 
>> group mailing list ([e-mail]) 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 is one IPR disclosure against this document. The data tracker 
>> says that there are 2 disclosure, but that depends on that the IPR 
>> holder updated the disclosure when the filename of the was changed.
>>
>> All the authors and contributors have stated on the MPLS wg mailing 
>> list that they are unaware of any other IPRs that relates to this document.
>>
>> The working group adoption poll ends November 30, 2021.
>>
>> /Loa
>> --
>> Loa Andersson                        email: [e-mail]
>> Senior MPLS Expert                          [e-mail]
>> Bronze Dragon Consulting             phone: [phone]
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> mpls mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpl
>> s 
>> __;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!SgOyDhVhmbQJekuvJ2xQkqZk6M6S_d5o0flFkAlL_s2OcTwo1vos
>> w
>> 5v74ANYF1no$

--
Loa Andersson                        email: [e-mail]
Senior MPLS Expert                          [e-mail]
Bronze Dragon Consulting             phone: [phone]