IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to adopt draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis as a wg doc

"Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com> Sat, 19 December 2015 13:45 UTC

Return-Path: <agmalis@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 623E11A89AC; Sat, 19 Dec 2015 05:45:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Mn0VRwNARwlx; Sat, 19 Dec 2015 05:45:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wm0-x22b.google.com (mail-wm0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F01AF1A89AA; Sat, 19 Dec 2015 05:45:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wm0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id l126so17920710wml.0; Sat, 19 Dec 2015 05:45:19 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=BmZTyDmGuhXHkN/z9xTDD2BAVVCQzc96Qd6P1+Umlak=; b=oZkrpEdiMJzbtFQo7n0xxb0ANVH3kJ/YWwu7O9AUK/3WjE8OxThGDBtIrD2onWvFwx GzJvNy80XSaBP4VsBZzutYUZVkpLelOYKzng5O4pARkrZJFAlibjkHw0/SEn4nuJHi+v bYVjwEv87GI4TGaHgSJrb6i1K6BgxcyFfKaUtlG7rkU1wcoEciNSs7zhnWLb5RF7NrAe eesq9Uu7kuW9jFWxrLuLS2ifGp+LvP03Ni4iTlFoA5Kq/+IGsgmTk1zUgd8jGsOF+PyP yWFhaU/mYmsy9/iUaWEbzKLNleQo1e6X71YK7xJPPvfTzuoXCLPrva8yY+qPZ18/dtOd zuJQ==
X-Received: by 10.194.203.99 with SMTP id kp3mr9908513wjc.3.1450532718564; Sat, 19 Dec 2015 05:45:18 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.28.15.198 with HTTP; Sat, 19 Dec 2015 05:44:59 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <061FEE8B-A140-47C7-9115-A1F7607BAD47@gmail.com>
References: <5674E8EF.80807@pi.nu> <061FEE8B-A140-47C7-9115-A1F7607BAD47@gmail.com>
From: "Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2015 08:44:59 -0500
Message-ID: <CAA=duU31RgnrGV4G9O1MJoS0LqeeXn-SnGMZdWFQ4id_ZpN_TA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sam Aldrin <aldrin.ietf@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7bd91af26cdcfa05274077e5"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/hliT0_YK8PRj-NsC2wsvvgJvOqQ>
Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, "draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis@ietf.org" <draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis@ietf.org>, "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" <mpls-chairs@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to adopt draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis as a wg doc
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mpls/>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2015 13:45:22 -0000

Absolutely, it’s overdue for MPLS OAM and LSP Ping to be a full Standard.

Cheers,
Andy


On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 12:53 AM, Sam Aldrin <aldrin.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

> Strong Yes for adoption.
> Lot of enhancements went it, via various RFC’s, which makes RFC4379 an
> incomplete document for MPLS OAM.
> Hence this bis is very much essential and long overdue.
>
> -sam
> > On Dec 18, 2015, at 9:19 PM, Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu> wrote:
> >
> > Working Group,
> >
> > This is to start a three week (because of the holiday season) poll
> > to see if we have consensus to adopt draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis
> > as an MPLS working group document.
> >
> > Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working
> > group mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). Please give a technical
> > motivation for your support/not support, especially if you think that
> > the document should not be adopted as a working group document.
> >
> > There are no IPR disclosures directly against
> draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis document. However, there are IPR disclosures
> against
> > RFC 4379.
> >
> > We have started an IPR poll in parallel to the adoption poll.
> >
> > The document shepherd and working group chairs are frequently asked
> > about the working group discussions related to any IPR disclosures.
> >
> > We like to remind the working group that discussion on the content
> > and validity of an IPR disclosure should not take place on the
> > MPLS wg list or any IETF mailing lists.
> >
> > However we are looking for simple statements whether you think the
> > working group should continue progress the document, regardless of
> > an existing IPR disclosure. Please include this information in your
> > 'support/do not support' when responding to working group adoption
> > calls and last calls.
> >
> > This working group adoptiom poll ends January 8, 2016.
> >
> > /Loa
> > --
> >
> >
> > Loa Andersson                        email: loa@mail01.huawei.com
> > Senior MPLS Expert                          loa@pi.nu
> > Huawei Technologies (consultant)     phone: +46 739 81 21 64
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email