IETF Logo Mail Archive

[mpls] Re: Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-mpls-mna-hdr

Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com> Wed, 05 June 2024 15:31 UTC

Return-Path: <stewart.bryant@gmail.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 570DCC14F5E3; Wed, 5 Jun 2024 08:31:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.094
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.094 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 7PJvakcHfciQ; Wed, 5 Jun 2024 08:31:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr1-x436.google.com (mail-wr1-x436.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::436]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D41AC1DA2CC; Wed, 5 Jun 2024 08:31:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr1-x436.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-35dcff36522so2155738f8f.1; Wed, 05 Jun 2024 08:31:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1717601469; x=1718206269; darn=ietf.org; h=references:to:cc:in-reply-to:date:subject:mime-version:message-id :from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=nvu2zEq+pt4mGkdeUYcducXLWBcQbwVf/DG4cZ2jBhQ=; b=Ahd8lktT1N2rqHu37wc/uAGPj2J1mZ+wDvHDgyoiwtplXo4Bbzps806SrcWDRai39E SWBAAQyhh4TWjRBUU4cNuq/u14B1FOM7I1QBuAhPU7B0+0R/Wd98HUknjph17kkT+N3H LusZBtvSLykDmXRj49ngXjUoeWvwt0H2GjaSfC0v8o1EL9ewHGqp9mZNkAB4lO3NYIZ6 F/b+hE1H0YfC0JH0mtvueK/zunuL1DhBEVNZsTAD7wWtUqVcOXWdJw53cl68Fswu5oWd UIPRYk0F5HHQtgjOpYJWLrI0+wdlBzjQDlqr5ESvFKIlNbepAezQ9aA4jYc1E5iQP8eD D6qg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1717601469; x=1718206269; h=references:to:cc:in-reply-to:date:subject:mime-version:message-id :from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=nvu2zEq+pt4mGkdeUYcducXLWBcQbwVf/DG4cZ2jBhQ=; b=CISpqohOixe3ranlIQkDsKBE/7julMz89AMiW0S8U4yBADi7Oiu+fXQiK875BZFh/7 KbedjnmdiTxxVkDumuzVbdPD9/11SGIlQZmRJFH8/vZkriinUBY2bVuJH1d4fLpqdlr4 uNXwJQRW3CLU+2UsEb/jr1leGLQfZdB147dk56MBnPD4iFdYpK2gAIQ7xESKk5BEwdJz 6igAomtLE97MbZUCYIK8KCvwDmPn+I4ftPv7FgFPMrxk9yhdh/3khWgZh/bHb4Fz9LId +0T9R54Kfj4DCKG0VXkPMkMtJ2asMPr+AVO7v5d0Es5vbYy+JQyAe/bYzQKnAU8VTj2r tIzQ==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUWs/j4DQn7uV17lmm+xGrySn1Z9airT59QxjGOpragCjYIyDteujKrMXpPws4R5wfl2RnMaIBxqIwKc75qd30ZN+03ei1n3+zY0kKfp8yHnnVMJFEy4aeB6ELZ0VxpsKrcR+ctEoyMC7TyROHJvEpE97Assd4=
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyAM31qlES/m8mfBZOenQx806bKZEy7nsansUT/CKDNCptQFfBR rcxVSjPX+ZJtqEbrXM+TmKPxbWFcVP7b+QWqHJMHhELtJMB7lQQS
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGlo5+vYE6Z2uKxmewT540JhLEfeP4TCVo+23lWrKzDlkqFM2aTX6gpUwNaDC/NpYSo5HBh9A==
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:4741:0:b0:359:b737:51de with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-35e84062e2fmr2135605f8f.10.1717601468981; Wed, 05 Jun 2024 08:31:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple ([85.255.234.202]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-35dd062ec29sm14764702f8f.81.2024.06.05.08.31.08 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 05 Jun 2024 08:31:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <B2A706BE-A232-4F32-B1F1-9BB328CAD8B9@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_337355BE-D705-4642-8C44-4D8EDB4ABBFA"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3774.500.171.1.1\))
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2024 16:30:57 +0100
In-Reply-To: <DS0PR19MB65014515D511B396E79BA36FFCF82@DS0PR19MB6501.namprd19.prod.outlook.com>
To: Tarek Saad <tsaad.net@gmail.com>
References: <DS0PR19MB65014515D511B396E79BA36FFCF82@DS0PR19MB6501.namprd19.prod.outlook.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3774.500.171.1.1)
Message-ID-Hash: GIRMGUE33S4UMVPFOHCC6IOKO5AOOENH
X-Message-ID-Hash: GIRMGUE33S4UMVPFOHCC6IOKO5AOOENH
X-MailFrom: stewart.bryant@gmail.com
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: mpls <mpls@ietf.org>, MPLS Working Chairs <mpls-chairs@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-mpls-mna-hdr@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-mpls-mna-hdr@ietf.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [mpls] Re: Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-mpls-mna-hdr
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/KMOQIzxtqm6EaDHy1UctDAUgszo>
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>

Without prejudice to the technology itself which I will review shortly.

The WG rejected another technology because it was encumbered with IPR. 

https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/tMJybst_lhIx43M3_ic9e9x3_fI/

For example Tony Li, now an MPLS WG Chair, says:

"I do NOT support adopting this as a working group document.

"I find that the terms of the IPR disclosure are overly restrictive and would prefer that we selected a different technology for this problem.”

As far as I can see from the IPR disclosures, this technology is encumbered with similar IPR terms and is thus also overly restricted.

For consistency It would appear that we should also reject draft-ietf-mpls-mna-hdr on the grounds of restricted IPR.

I therefore propose that draft-ietf-mpls-mna-hdr is rejected as a solution.

Best regards

Stewart



> On 4 Jun 2024, at 03:50, Tarek Saad <tsaad.net@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Dear WG,
> This email starts a two-week Working Group last call for draft-ietf-mpls-mna-hdr <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-mna-hdr/>.
> Please indicate your support or concern for this draft. If you are opposed to the progression of the draft to RFC, please articulate your concern. If you support it, please indicate that you have read the latest version, and it is ready for publication in your opinion. As always, review comments and nits are most welcome.
> Please send your comments to the mpls WG mailing list (mpls@ietf.org <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>).
> If necessary, comments may be sent unidirectional to the WG chairs.
>  
> Note, currently there are 5 IPR disclosures against this document at https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?submit=draft&id=draft-ietf-mpls-mna-hdr
>  
> This poll runs until June 18, 2024.
> Thank you,
> Tarek (for the MPLS WG co-chairs)
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list -- mpls@ietf.org <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
> To unsubscribe send an email to mpls-leave@ietf.org <mailto:mpls-leave@ietf.org>

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status