IETF Logo Mail Archive

[mpls] Re: John Scudder's Discuss on draft-ietf-mpls-inband-pm-encapsulation-15: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

xiao.min2@zte.com.cn Wed, 11 September 2024 02:02 UTC

Return-Path: <xiao.min2@zte.com.cn>
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 903ACC15155F; Tue, 10 Sep 2024 19:02:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.905
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.905 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mmJjEY4VNact; Tue, 10 Sep 2024 19:02:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mxhk.zte.com.cn (mxhk.zte.com.cn [63.216.63.40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CEFB5C14CEED; Tue, 10 Sep 2024 19:02:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mxct.zte.com.cn (unknown [192.168.251.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mxhk.zte.com.cn (FangMail) with ESMTPS id 4X3P3S2dKRz8RSdL; Wed, 11 Sep 2024 10:02:44 +0800 (CST)
Received: from mse-fl1.zte.com.cn (unknown [10.5.228.132]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mxct.zte.com.cn (FangMail) with ESMTPS id 4X3P2t1bMdz50FXL; Wed, 11 Sep 2024 10:02:14 +0800 (CST)
Received: from njy2app08.zte.com.cn ([10.40.13.206]) by mse-fl1.zte.com.cn with SMTP id 48B21sp1032918; Wed, 11 Sep 2024 10:01:54 +0800 (+08) (envelope-from xiao.min2@zte.com.cn)
Received: from mapi (njy2app02[null]) by mapi (Zmail) with MAPI id mid201; Wed, 11 Sep 2024 10:01:56 +0800 (CST)
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2024 10:01:56 +0800
X-Zmail-TransId: 2afa66e0fa14fffffffff33-b07d5
X-Mailer: Zmail v1.0
Message-ID: <20240911100156048dP6w_A4FIAVNwrbxak71s@zte.com.cn>
In-Reply-To: <EC7BD33D-D588-4912-92BB-1BF7D36EBA4B@tony.li>
References: 20240909084747863DD6L3jyLtJvvqYF9jzk2r@zte.com.cn,202409101437205152g3Mg6rXkxl2HdIohx8JX@zte.com.cn,EB996189-172B-4E96-A797-542A7AE0622F@gmail.com,0A606080-BC97-47B7-AD48-779511BC5910@tony.li,MW5PR13MB5485FB738A4E1D49D160026ED29A2@MW5PR13MB5485.namprd13.prod.outlook.com,58CB27C6-9D7A-4111-837B-A81B6B5F49CE@gmail.com,EC7BD33D-D588-4912-92BB-1BF7D36EBA4B@tony.li
Mime-Version: 1.0
From: xiao.min2@zte.com.cn
To: tony.li@tony.li
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====_001_next====="
X-MAIL: mse-fl1.zte.com.cn 48B21sp1032918
X-Fangmail-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-Fangmail-MID-QID: 66E0FA44.000/4X3P3S2dKRz8RSdL
Message-ID-Hash: VUWWXORO5NPQJJ5CJSUCP37O2G74GFNH
X-Message-ID-Hash: VUWWXORO5NPQJJ5CJSUCP37O2G74GFNH
X-MailFrom: xiao.min2@zte.com.cn
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-mpls.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: draft-ietf-mpls-inband-pm-encapsulation@ietf.org, tsaad@cisco.com, mpls@ietf.org, mpls-chairs@ietf.org, iesg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [mpls] Re: John Scudder's Discuss on draft-ietf-mpls-inband-pm-encapsulation-15: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/HZPDMkqGjrzsmSzO0irinh4wNMg>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mpls>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:mpls-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:mpls-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:mpls-leave@ietf.org>

Hi Tony,

Have we reached a compromise on the modified text?
Is the text proposed by Stewart acceptable to you or not?

Cheers,
Xiao Min


Original


From: TonyLi <tony.li@tony.li>
To: Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>;
Cc: James Guichard <james.n.guichard@futurewei.com>;肖敏10093570;draft-ietf-mpls-inband-pm-encapsulation <draft-ietf-mpls-inband-pm-encapsulation@ietf.org>;tsaad@cisco.com <tsaad@cisco.com>;mpls <mpls@ietf.org>;mpls-chairs <mpls-chairs@ietf.org>;The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>;
Date: 2024年09月11日 01:18
Subject: Re: [mpls] John Scudder's Discuss on draft-ietf-mpls-inband-pm-encapsulation-15: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)




Hi Stewart,



I don’t think we should make definite statements prior to the fact, and I remain of the view that if people want to continue to use the approach described here we should permit them to do so and not pull the rug from under their feet.





Marking something historic does not prevent anyone from using it.  In this particular case, the implementors and users of this draft already are well aware of what’s been agreed to and support the decision, so there is no surprise whatsoever.  I suspect that they will use their current deployments indefinitely and may never migrate to MNA. And that’s just fine.

T

v2.27.8 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status