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

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
>