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

["Zafar Ali (zali)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Tony

I am aware of the thread but all we hear is that chairs are discussing the responses and will share further update, “interest” vs. “consensus” debate, the chairs are discussing how to initiate the PSD debate, etc. There were 65 emails on the original PSD poll. I am not sure why we need another round of debate and what will be the nature of that debate. Why not just start WG adoption call and gauge the WG “consensus”.

For the reason many others and I mentioned, I also fail to see the rush to progress draft-ietf-mpls-mna-hdr, prematurely.
Let’s first have the working group complete the work on PSD and all the pieces and gain implementation maturity.

Thanks

Regards … Zafar

From: Tony Li <[e-mail]> on behalf of Tony Li <[e-mail]>
Date: Sunday, September 29, 2024 at 2:00 AM
To: Zafar Ali (zali) <[e-mail]>
Cc: Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran=[e-mail]>, Dongjie (Jimmy) <jie.dong=[e-mail]>, Tarek Saad <[e-mail]>, mpls <[e-mail]>, mpls-chairs <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-mpls-mna-hdr (2nd WG call)
[WG chair hat: on]

Hi Zafar,


On Sep 28, 2024, at 10:22 PM, Zafar Ali (zali) - zali at cisco.com <[e-mail]> wrote:

There was a rather encrypted WG poll on PSD interest which shows clear support from vendors and operators to work on the PSD option.
However, the working group has not heard any outcome of the poll.

Tarek posted the outcome of the poll on August 14th: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/qHBCt-X17u_VLIbuJuuS22C-ru8/

There were several subsequent comments on that thread that were also relevant.

T