Re: [mpls] IPR poll on draft-bryant-mpls-flow-ident

Stephen Farrell <> Thu, 26 November 2015 01:28 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30C2F1A8829; Wed, 25 Nov 2015 17:28:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.886
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.886 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.585, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TTRZdv9G0qTt; Wed, 25 Nov 2015 17:28:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DECC01A8822; Wed, 25 Nov 2015 17:28:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91A0BBDF9; Thu, 26 Nov 2015 01:28:15 +0000 (GMT)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3HILWtraivuh; Thu, 26 Nov 2015 01:28:14 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from [] (unknown []) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1F909BDD0; Thu, 26 Nov 2015 01:28:13 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;; s=mail; t=1448501294; bh=HxJKxl/htiqYaLwHt6fh1R90Nv9nDya3ZHik4MwCT1A=; h=Subject:To:References:Cc:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=zlTHffRXjZZ9N6tvGfSfw6igYIYileiJqzAuIicbNy9OHDwOc9B3/SIJKpJww+mVU XwS63mYkKT0E+rBudjqZ9gEVZZPKnhvL+WP42TPEA8yIm6KSu7IrKfObAta2IpNUsD GY8b+rwhpx11HDgaYpHxL4s22/+8N3ulYSRZOD4Y=
To: Ross Callon <>, "" <>, "Stewart Bryant (stbryant)" <>, Stewart Bryant <>, "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" <>, "Mach Chen (" <>, "" <>, Gregory Mirsky <>
References: <>
From: Stephen Farrell <>
Openpgp: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url=
Message-ID: <>
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 01:28:12 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
Cc: "" <>
Subject: Re: [mpls] IPR poll on draft-bryant-mpls-flow-ident
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 01:28:19 -0000

I'm afraid I don't understand section 11 at all. (It's title
is "privacy considerations" but it's current content bemuses me;-)

If this is adopted and if that section gets fixed (e.g. to become
some kind of applicability statement), then that would be a fine

There's a bit of work to be done to figure out when this is a safe
or unsafe thing to do from the privacy perspective and to document
that, but such work should be something the WG is well able for.

Put another way: I support adoption of this (not that I know squat
about MPLS;-) on the assumption that section 11 gets fixed. And I'm
confident fixing that should not be hard.

But in any case - I am very happy to see section 11 in an MPLS
document - recognition that privacy is an issue, even at this layer,
does represent progress. (Thanks to the authors for that.)


On 12/11/15 16:28, Ross Callon wrote:
> Working Group,
> The authors of draft-bryant-mpls-flow-ident have told us that the
> draft is ready to be polled to see if we have consensus to make it a working
> group document.
> Before we start the adoption poll we will do an IPR poll. This mail starts the IPR poll.
> Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-bryant-mpls-flow-ident?
> If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules
> (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details).
> Currently there are no IPR disclosures that relate to this document.
> If you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to
> this email regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant
> IPR. *The response needs to be sent to the MPLS wg mailing list.* The
> document will not advance to the next stage until a response has been
> received from each author and contributor.
> If you are on the MPLS WG email list but are not listed as an author or
> contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any
> IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules.
> Thanks, Ross
> (as MPLS WG co-chair)
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list