IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mpls] Working Group adoption of draft-farrel-mpls-sfc

" 徐小虎(义先) " <xiaohu.xxh@alibaba-inc.com> Wed, 28 March 2018 08:17 UTC

Return-Path: <xiaohu.xxh@alibaba-inc.com>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38B48126D73; Wed, 28 Mar 2018 01:17:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 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_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=alibaba-inc.com
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 l7IW2AsgT-hP; Wed, 28 Mar 2018 01:17:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out0-139.mail.aliyun.com (out0-139.mail.aliyun.com [140.205.0.139]) (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 2868E1200C1; Wed, 28 Mar 2018 01:17:10 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alibaba-inc.com; s=default; t=1522225027; h=Date:From:To:Message-ID:Subject:MIME-Version:Content-Type; bh=jPKkdnMbqX6t7RdlwyhiCiCJIbD197gEEq8bD31JuhA=; b=e6dYFteE0qLLi+RGLMBxkMEoaDmJWlVBBzqz10ojGjTdTyuLIpH8jmpoJZp7yy/6+TnfvqJixYN/6waDyW2Wky7ZPSAXK0+F2Ww3vKd3Xkm58maoZLGEOPywovZX6cWe+JXKtovgQ6NZXkHLNxLLCpjo5JXyGepGjZhMGI+uKcs=
X-Alimail-AntiSpam: AC=PASS; BC=-1|-1; BR=01201311R151e4; CH=green; FP=0|-1|-1|-1|0|-1|-1|-1; HT=e02c03301; MF=xiaohu.xxh@alibaba-inc.com; NM=1; PH=DW; RN=5; SR=0; TI=W4_5221377_v5ForWebDing_0A9326CB_1522224137436_o7001c269s;
Received: from WS-web (xiaohu.xxh@alibaba-inc.com[W4_5221377_v5ForWebDing_0A9326CB_1522224137436_o7001c269s]) by e01l04452.eu6 at Wed, 28 Mar 2018 16:17:04 +0800
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 16:17:04 +0800
From: "徐小虎(义先)" <xiaohu.xxh@alibaba-inc.com>
To: mpls <mpls-bounces@ietf.org>, "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-farrel-mpls-sfc <draft-farrel-mpls-sfc@ietf.org>, "sfc@ietf.org" <sfc@ietf.org>, "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" <mpls-chairs@ietf.org>
Reply-To: "徐小虎(义先)" <xiaohu.xxh@alibaba-inc.com>
Message-ID: <a392880f-6b86-4406-a348-42398e24285a.xiaohu.xxh@alibaba-inc.com>
X-Mailer: [Alimail-Mailagent revision 948139][W4_5221377][v5ForWebDing][Safari]
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <2ac6b61d-3a38-1aaf-62ae-d923f1ad7468@pi.nu>
In-Reply-To: <2ac6b61d-3a38-1aaf-62ae-d923f1ad7468@pi.nu>
x-aliyun-mail-creator: W4_5221377_v5ForWebDing_QvNTW96aWxsYS81LjAgKE1hY2ludG9zaDsgSW50ZWwgTWFjIE9TIFggMTBfMTJfNikgQXBwbGVXZWJLaXQvNjA0LjUuNiAoS0hUTUwsIGxpa2UgR2Vja28pIFZlcnNpb24vMTEuMC4zIFNhZmFyaS82MDQuNS42La
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=ALIBOUNDARY_25988_56c55940_5abb4f80_49c913"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/C6RAxVNoq9ynbVzhS-jLztcis9o>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Working Group adoption of draft-farrel-mpls-sfc
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 08:17:15 -0000

Hi Loa,
I don't believe the modification in Section 6 of draft-farrel-mpls-sfc (https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-farrel-mpls-sfc-05.txt) has eliminated the serious conflict with the SR-MPLS-based SFC approach as described in  https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xu-mpls-service-chaining-03 (note that this draft has been merged into https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xu-clad-spring-sr-service-chaining-00), as had been pointed by many people before.
Therefore, it seems a little bit unreasonable to hurry the adoption of the current version, IMHO.
Xiaohu------------------------------------------------------------------Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>2018年3月28日(星期三) 15:56mpls@ietf.org <mpls@ietf.org>draft-farrel-mpls-sfc <draft-farrel-mpls-sfc@ietf.org>; sfc@ietf.org <sfc@ietf.org>; mpls-chairs@ietf.org <mpls-chairs@ietf.org>[mpls] Working Group adoption of draft-farrel-mpls-sfc
Working Group,

The MPLS working group have decided to adopt draft-farrel-mpls-sfc-05 as
an MPLS working group document.

Can the authors please post draft-ietf-mpls-sfc-00, without any other
than administrative (filename, version and dates) changes.

/Loa
for the MPLS wg chairs

-- 


Loa Andersson                        email: loa@pi.nu
Senior MPLS Expert
Bronze Dragon Consulting             phone: +46 739 81 21 64

_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email