Re: [mpls] Poll on way forward for MNA solution

["Jisu Bhattacharya (jisu)" <[e-mail]>]

To be specific, I support option (B), to progress draft-jags-mpls-mna-hdr as a single solution for MNA.

Thanks,
Jisu

From: Jisu Bhattacharya (jisu) <[e-mail]>
Date: Monday, September 12, 2022 at 12:48 PM
To: Jaganbabu Rajamanickam <[e-mail]>
Cc: Tarek Saad <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] <[e-mail]>, DetNet Chairs <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on way forward for MNA solution
I agree.

Thanks,
Jisu

From: Jaganbabu Rajamanickam <[e-mail]>
Date: Monday, September 12, 2022 at 11:36 AM
To:
Cc: Tarek Saad <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] <[e-mail]>, DetNet Chairs <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on way forward for MNA solution





There is already a reasonably solid solution defined in draft-jags-mpls-mna-hdr that is represented by multiple vendors industry-wide.

I support option (B) as to progress draft-jags-mpls-mna-hdr as a single solution for MNA.



I do not believe that option (A) is a good idea, i.e., for the open DT team to take pieces from the

solution presented and bring forward as a new document with new authors.



From: mpls <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> on behalf of Tarek Saad <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Date: Tuesday, 6 September 2022 at 19:50
To: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Cc: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>, [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>, DetNet Chairs <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Subject: [mpls] Poll on way forward for MNA solution
Dear MPLS WG and MPLS Open DT,

Over the past months, the MPLS Open DT has reviewed several proposals for the packet encodings for the MNA solution.
A compilation of the multiple solutions brought forward is present at https://trac.ietf.org/trac/mpls/wiki/MNADocumnets.

We believe that currently there are two alternative ways to progress the MNA solution.
One of them requires a single unified solution, and the other allows for individual solutions to progress independently.
We expect any unified solution to document the pieces from the presented solutions that are discussed and agreed upon in the weekly MPLS Open DT meeting.


The co-chairs for the working groups hosting the Open MPLS DT are polling the WG on their preference to move forward.
Please respond with either:


    A) “I support the MPLS Open DT bringing forward a single unified solution"
    OR
    B) “I support progressing the individual solution(s) independently"

We will allow this poll to run for two weeks (ending on Sept 19th).

Regards,
Tarek (for the MPLS Open DT co-chairs)
_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls