[mpls] Re: Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-mpls-mna-hdr (2nd WG call)

[Stewart Bryant <[e-mail]>]

Hi Greg

We can only assess that in the light of knowledge of the MNA applications and in particular the size of the sub-stack.

If the sub-stack size needed by the MNA applications means that much legacy equipment is unable to support the required stack size the issue tends to moot.

- Stewart

> On 7 Oct 2024, at 17:31, Greg Mirsky <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Stewart,
> Making MNA use eSPL instead of bSPL might significantly decrease the scope of the intended experiment by eliminating deployed systems with limited MSD capabilities.
> 
> Regards,
> Greg
> 
> On Mon, Oct 7, 2024 at 7:31 AM Stewart Bryant <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>> I have been thinking the same.
>> 
>> Hop by hop changes of this magnitude are a big deal.
>> 
>> The safest option would be to run it as experimental protocol on an ESPL. That way we can learn more about the design and its properties and if we need to make a change we have plenty more ESPLs
>> 
>> If the experiment succeeds we can move to PS with a BSPL.
>> 
>> Stewart 
>> 
>> > On 7 Oct 2024, at 10:13 AM, IJsbrand Wijnands <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>> > 
>> > Dear MPLS WG,
>> > 
>> > Given the nature of the changes to the MPLS architecture for supporting ISD in the data-plane, and the various concerns that have raised on the list, I believe that this document should be on the experimental track.
>> > 
>> > I do not support publishing this document on standards track.
>> > 
>> > Thx,
>> > 
>> > Ice.
>> > 
>> >> On 24 Sep 2024, at 15:25, Tarek Saad <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> Dear WG,
>> >> 
>> >> This email starts a two-week Working Group last call for draft-ietf-mpls-mna-hdr. This is the 2nd WG last call for this document.
>> >> Please indicate your support or concern for this draft. If you are opposed to the progression of the draft to RFC, please articulate your concern. If you support it, please indicate that you have read the latest version, and it is ready for publication in your opinion. As always, review comments and nits are most welcome.
>> >> 
>> >> Please send your comments to the mpls WG mailing list ([e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>).
>> >> If necessary, comments may be sent unidirectional to the WG chairs.
>> >> 
>> >> Note, currently there are 5 IPR disclosures against this document at https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?submit=draft&id=draft-ietf-mpls-mna-hdr
>> >> 
>> >> This poll runs until October 8, 2024.
>> >> 
>> >> Thank you,
>> >> Tarek (for the MPLS WG co-chairs)
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> mpls mailing list -- [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>> >> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>> > 
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > mpls mailing list -- [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>> > To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> mpls mailing list -- [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>