Re: [mpls] Formal poll to abandon draft-ietf-mpls-sfl-control

I will be sad as well, but no one has expressed any interest in the control plane work only in unblocking the other SFL drafts.

Interestingly the last time this was on the MPLS agenda people asked for control planes for LDP and RSVP-TE, but no one offered to so any work on this.

In the intervening years SDN has become more prevalent and I suggest that anyone wanting to deploy a facility that this simple control plane would address would probably use SDN to manage the SFLs.

If there is someone that wants to put this in a network and there is at least one other person interested in working through how it works in detail then I would be prepared to take this to completion, but in the absence of both such commitments I think it should go back to the WG and presumably eventually expire.

- Stewart

> On 13 Mar 2024, at 04:20, loa@pi.nu wrote:
> 
> Adrian,
> 
> You have correctly interpreted my feelings, I think it is sad that we
> drop the document.
> 
> Since there seems to be no support for continuing the work, I have to accept
> that the document is dropped.
> 
> /Loa
> 
>> All,
>> 
>> As you will have seen, there has been some discussion on the list about
>> the
>> work still needed to complete draft-ietf-mpls-sfl-control and a bug in the
>> spec that Stewart has discovered.
>> 
>> I asked on the list (2024-02-26) whether anyone is still interested in
>> this
>> work
>> (https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/eW8SpBzEAZRlsiTPhPbSd3DnrPQ/)
>> I repeated the question (2024-03-04)
>> Stewart rephrased my questions (2024-03-04) to ask if anyone has
>> implemented
>> or deployed, or has plans to implement or deploy
>> (https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/i4IC05iAheiYlKGIFq-8iu7nhjg/)
>> 
>> The only response has been from Loa, suggesting that if someone is willing
>> to do the work then he would support them, and that (my interpretation) he
>> would be sad to see the document dropped.
>> 
>> So, this email is a formal call for consensus.
>> 
>> The chairs propose to pull the document back from the AD and drop it from
>> the working group. This would allow anyone to pick the document up again
>> in
>> the future, but it would need to go back through the working group
>> adoption
>> process.
>> 
>> Please speak up if you are opposed to this action. In particular, please
>> state why you are opposed (e.g., you know something about
>> implementation/deployment) and how you propose that the document should
>> move
>> forward (i.e., who would do what work).
>> 
>> In the absence of voices opposed to this approach, the chairs will take
>> the
>> action.
>> 
>> This call ends on Tuesday 19th March 2024 at 17.00 UTC (i.e., after the
>> MPLS
>> session at IETF-119).
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Adrian (on behalf of the MPLS WG chairs)
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> mpls mailing list
>> mpls@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls