IETF Logo Mail Archive

[mpls] Re: John Scudder's Discuss on draft-ietf-mpls-inband-pm-encapsulation-15: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com> Tue, 10 September 2024 10:21 UTC

Return-Path: <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A0EBC1D6203; Tue, 10 Sep 2024 03:21:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.108
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.108 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wyyDUkhTiIEL; Tue, 10 Sep 2024 03:21:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ej1-x62b.google.com (mail-ej1-x62b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62b]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 960FBC1840EB; Tue, 10 Sep 2024 03:21:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ej1-x62b.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-a7aa086b077so492449666b.0; Tue, 10 Sep 2024 03:21:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1725963690; x=1726568490; darn=ietf.org; h=to:references:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:cc:date :in-reply-to:from:subject:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=wOpN9kzKHZjiUHGbh86pYrfMDR2ly238K0cXhQ+auSE=; b=XmZb6CHkTqxbfRzwkq4MTtU5FOYeqJGrLczWWfuQrkZLRyqrkqNuMTPh7DUaIVodjz dgjM/qIH6RiDlD9WFo8RlIXm2X/uHyG4gGPTu2VO+bvXFbT5ZnzNzj+woFWcABBkrT1c NneRN/bBZHYG36BT/+fl+Ky/vZHCrdcJsp24xW6vq5oBXntrikKGzD2M8fuE7J912yTU yrDngXxBccopG6poYNwm//GUtZ4Alw4yL8QzaSZWsRfBQ3WraeKg4BVUsEcRdBONH/VV xucfj19BrCVNmTjG/Au7pISC+pE+aRpMPO9FSif4Zr9Auw+7qpIW7oK4dezCuxjI3ZU9 lz/A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1725963690; x=1726568490; h=to:references:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:cc:date :in-reply-to:from:subject:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=wOpN9kzKHZjiUHGbh86pYrfMDR2ly238K0cXhQ+auSE=; b=EFbsPEJqcc9LDl7pxYKxA6QKPXmgVd0QxnoGiMOazDug06Wk5tM1CXuDa+jx2NmaLk 0EELYYUjQv2ToxoTcoLNrmaEVPOfCURul+6Z6dbQV+N1S+RjLu/Gn3XlO912xDBaoKd0 mdKXEDscbAubYuTExn/KYjFn2RAapJYiHxw7BXGoCRJkfpmkObXCwkFbNLeV6WuFkEuA ldFgnbwQKg0fUNEaTTl3leHOW8ROdtrvIg9egDMQG4CEwiUKHlr0+TM6LxIxkwRNAn7/ 61WkF3YilbYykiNyVFF6wq01z3V95HMiOma2ys42mwC1BWYdJ5nTPaEjJ7M+PyAsuVuB wuQw==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCU1dOmmwE00kN+vxiPo5k/GhMfrnyl/G1y11QzThIxE4GS7k8PQknRRT1Vpxj7J0HDJGn33uQ==@ietf.org, AJvYcCVtVYVXEbIdQSqyOQt25PbYk11EF5lYL6MA+QuEvSSvoNvqokSZf7GqYNh6Y8Uj5xHqLVeZHK8MlH3/bkI=@ietf.org, AJvYcCXp7bwj6nAEaW1dynPRMDjhB743pFF68+0aP1h6ecSBUKl5Ny4kzQFojLRhQUR8xgXJXfcgMQE40/Yjfm8XkoplJlOxRtyeCltfVeBzcKUAIXBik8oOg6E=@ietf.org, AJvYcCXu9S84NRFbyOM2foPBmMFnOCbt5Hv5KwAhNmPwE7ur0zzV6GuZ3k1MsLiBT2Jdz1x9myGhEA==@ietf.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyYrOpEWGnhoKwmgEc7JWxNCFp8w3irqajflQN7AuPXZ62qruVX sLg11y/NsR+bi3Jl67kaMYgYVVNjMnGqnniLXOq8JkDoicaJ0/iG
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGiTGve6Gt1Y4wrtKoAy+2/K9dmfVTxb3Omli3JdD/syKj1TOdwWNyyROjzUAXsLefwBZfLcw==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:72d6:b0:a8a:cc5a:7f3a with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-a8ffad9e0b6mr22408166b.49.1725963688784; Tue, 10 Sep 2024 03:21:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple ([148.252.147.35]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a640c23a62f3a-a8d2597a660sm458930266b.75.2024.09.10.03.21.27 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 10 Sep 2024 03:21:28 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3776.700.51\))
From: Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <202409101437205152g3Mg6rXkxl2HdIohx8JX@zte.com.cn>
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2024 11:21:17 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <EB996189-172B-4E96-A797-542A7AE0622F@gmail.com>
References: <20240909084747863DD6L3jyLtJvvqYF9jzk2r@zte.com.cn,20240910141950285thZInxELPhbnFSBkdgXlH@zte.com.cn,63C1F4CE-3437-4A53-8196-93C00E5FBE6F@tony.li> <202409101437205152g3Mg6rXkxl2HdIohx8JX@zte.com.cn>
To: xiao.min2@zte.com.cn, Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li>, draft-ietf-mpls-inband-pm-encapsulation@ietf.org, tsaad@cisco.com, mpls <mpls@ietf.org>, mpls-chairs <mpls-chairs@ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3776.700.51)
Message-ID-Hash: 4QOULBHGJVGZJIFO2F677LRGZLM25YKL
X-Message-ID-Hash: 4QOULBHGJVGZJIFO2F677LRGZLM25YKL
X-MailFrom: stewart.bryant@gmail.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-mpls.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [mpls] Re: John Scudder's Discuss on draft-ietf-mpls-inband-pm-encapsulation-15: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/gCaBid-xhEkYP59DqypF1HchYt4>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mpls>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:mpls-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:mpls-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:mpls-leave@ietf.org>

I am not sure I understand the need to say anything about anticipated obsolescence of the protocol.

Once it is released in the wild it will have a life of its own determined by the needs of the operators. If they want to keep using it they will and we should not prevent them. As a method it is harmless and by using an ESPL it does not take any critical resources.

It is very rare that we actively obsolete anything like this unless it is actually harmful, or blocks some other more valuable method, neither of which apply here.

So why are we actively promoting the obsolescence of this technique rather than letting the market decide which is our normal approach?

Stewart

v2.27.6 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status