[mpls] should draft-ietf-mpls-spring-entropy-label be published as a RFC on the standards track?

Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu> Wed, 02 May 2018 07:44 UTC

Return-Path: <loa@pi.nu>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D7A21252BA; Wed, 2 May 2018 00:44:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ysJfF8eanEp8; Wed, 2 May 2018 00:44:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu []) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 56DB312E051; Wed, 2 May 2018 00:44:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] (81-236-221-144-no93.tbcn.telia.com []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 850C51801590; Wed, 2 May 2018 09:44:38 +0200 (CEST)
From: Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
To: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>
Cc: "spring@ietf.org" <spring@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-mpls-spring-entropy-label@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-mpls-spring-entropy-label@ietf.org>, "mpls-ads@ietf.org" <mpls-ads@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <a3dbc94b-061c-8eb8-7302-3a60f3db4a3f@pi.nu>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 09:44:38 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/jkIyTLOI6BAvw6jdDfJVdzjZPOU>
Subject: [mpls] should draft-ietf-mpls-spring-entropy-label be published as a RFC on the standards track?
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Wed, 02 May 2018 07:44:50 -0000

Working Group,

February 1st the MPLS working Group requested that draft-ietf-mpls-
spring-entropy-label should be published as an Informational RFC.

During the RTG Directorate and AD reviews the question whether the
document should instead be published as a RFC on the Standards Track
has been raised.

The decision to make the document Informational was taken "a long time
ago", based on discussions between the authors and involving the
document shepherd, on the wg mailing list. At that point it we were
convinced that the document should be progressed as an Informational

It turns out that there has been such changes to the document that we
now would like to request input from the working group if we should make
the document a Standards Track RFC.

Daniele's RTG Directorate review can be found at at:

All the issues, with the exception whether it should be Informational
or Standards track, has been resolved as part AD review.

If the document is progressed as a Standard Tracks document then we
also need to answer the question whether this is an update RFC 6790.

This mail starts a one week poll (ending May 9) to see if we have
support to make the document a Standards Track document. If you support
placing it on the Standards Track also consider if it is an update to
RFC 6790.

Please send your comments to the MPLS wg mailing list ( mpls@ietf.org ).

for the mpls wf co-chairs


I'm copying the spring working group on this mail.

Loa Andersson                        email: loa@pi.nu
Senior MPLS Expert
Bronze Dragon Consulting             phone: +46 739 81 21 64