[mpls] Re: Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-mpls-mna-hdr (2nd WG call)

["Dongjie (Jimmy)" <[e-mail]>]

I agree with the proposal of making this document experimental. It would give chance to collect implementation experience, validate the design, then make necessary changes to the specification. 

Using eSPL is also a reasonable approach to save the precious bSPL resource during the experiment stage. The difference between eSPL and bSPL can be taken into consideration in the experiment. 

Best regards,
Jie

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stewart Bryant <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Monday, October 7, 2024 10:31 PM
> To: IJsbrand Wijnands <[e-mail]>
> Cc: [e-mail]; MPLS Working Chairs <[e-mail]>;
> [e-mail]
> Subject: [mpls] Re: Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-mpls-mna-hdr (2nd
> WG call)
> 
> I have been thinking the same.
> 
> Hop by hop changes of this magnitude are a big deal.
> 
> The safest option would be to run it as experimental protocol on an ESPL. That
> way we can learn more about the design and its properties and if we need to
> make a change we have plenty more ESPLs
> 
> If the experiment succeeds we can move to PS with a BSPL.
> 
> Stewart
> 
> > On 7 Oct 2024, at 10:13 AM, IJsbrand Wijnands <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
> >
> > Dear MPLS WG,
> >
> > Given the nature of the changes to the MPLS architecture for supporting ISD
> in the data-plane, and the various concerns that have raised on the list, I
> believe that this document should be on the experimental track.
> >
> > I do not support publishing this document on standards track.
> >
> > Thx,
> >
> > Ice.
> >
> >> On 24 Sep 2024, at 15:25, Tarek Saad <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Dear WG,
> >>
> >> This email starts a two-week Working Group last call for
> draft-ietf-mpls-mna-hdr. This is the 2nd WG last call for this document.
> >> 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 ([e-mail])
> >> 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-h
> dr
> >>
> >> This poll runs until October 8, 2024.
> >>
> >> Thank you,
> >> Tarek (for the MPLS WG co-chairs)
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> mpls mailing list -- [e-mail]
> >> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > mpls mailing list -- [e-mail]
> > To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]