[mpls] Re: 答复: Working Group Adoption Poll for draft-li-mpls-mna-nrp-selector

[Joel Halpern <[e-mail]>]

I am not seeing why there is a need to step back.

The Ipv6 draft, the TEAS draft (which really belongs in the MPLS WG) and 
the ISD NROP draft represent three different ways of encoding the 
information for different cases.  The two MPLS approaches represent 
different balances, probably suitable for different situations.

Yours,

Joel

On 5/4/2025 1:32 AM, Loa Andersson wrote:
> --Greg,
>
> I understand that you been working on all these drafts, that does not 
> change the need I see to step back and take  breath, take step back 
> and evaluate the entire set of drafts in this corner of the technology.
>
> /Loa
>
>
> Den 04/05/2025 kl. 03:26, skrev Greg Mirsky:
>> Hi Loa,
>> thank you for the clarification. Please find my notes below tagged 
>> GIM>>.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Greg
>>
>> On Sat, May 3, 2025 at 2:41 AM Loa Andersson <[e-mail] 
>> <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>>
>>     Greg,
>>
>>     inline plz.
>>
>>     Den 29/04/2025 kl. 23:21, skrev Greg Mirsky:
>>      > Hi Loa,
>>      > I've reviewed <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/
>>     <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/>
>>      > GgY4VnmcE5XkFzZ7l6KqrJWjPLY/>draft-li-mpls-mna-nrp-selector on 
>> the
>>      > request of RtgDir. I am not aware of any other document that
>>     proposes a
>>      > mechanism to signal a dedicated NRP Selector ID in the MPLS
>>     networks.
>>
>>     The two drafts I thought of are:
>>
>>     - draft-li-mpls-enhanced-vpn-vtn-id
>>     - draft-ietf-teas-ns-ip-mpls
>>
>>     The were both mentioned during the WGAP.
>>
>>     When there are draft closely neighbouring over even overlapping 
>> it is a
>>     good practice to have an ideaon where this corner of the 
>> technology is
>>     going and if there are good reasons to hold up a bit to allow 
>> authors
>>     and working groupos look into if we want to merge or continue to
>>     separate documents.
>>
>>
>>     I think we should take the time and consider these draft relative to
>>     each other.
>>
>> GIM>> I actively participated in thework of TEAS WG and commented on 
>> draft-ietf-teas-ns-ip-mpls and onthe topic of NRP Selector ID. Also, 
>> I closely follow draft-ietf-6man-enhanced-vpn-vtn-id <https:// 
>> datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-6man-enhanced-vpn-vtn-id/>that
>>
>> "specifies a new IPv6 Hop-by-Hop option to carry network
>>
>> resource related information (e.g., identifier) in data packets.  The
>>
>> NR Option can also be generalized for other network resource
>>
>> semantics and functions."
>>
>> Thus, in my opinion, the scope of draft-li-mpls-enhanced-vpn-vtn-id 
>> analogous to draft-ietf-6man-enhanced-vpn-vtn-id, and if 6man WG 
>> determined that a dedicated mechanism to carry NRP information 
>> addresses the real problem, so should the MPLS WG. Interestingly, I 
>> find that several opponents of WG adopting 
>> draft-li-mpls-enhanced-vpn-vtn-id are among the authors of 
>> draft-ietf-6man-enhanced-vpn-vtn-id.
>>
>>
>>     /Loa
>>
>>
>>
>>      > AFAIK, it is possible to use existing data plane elements to
>>     express NRP
>>      > ID, but none of that mechanism will be standardized as PS, thus
>>     causing
>>      > a legitimate interoperability concern. Standardizing the 
>> method to
>>      > signal the dedicated NRP Selector ID, in my opinion, is 
>> necessary.
>>      >
>>      > Regards,
>>      > Greg
>>      >
>>      > On Tue, Apr 29, 2025 at 2:16 AM Loa Andersson <[e-mail]
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>      > <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>> wrote:
>>      >
>>      >     Aijun, Tianran, and Joel,
>>      >
>>      >     I'm not fully up to speed on NRP, and might have missed
>>     something.
>>      >
>>      >     But I understand that there are issues with this WGAP
>>      >
>>      >     - there are other drafts about witch it has been claimed that
>>     they
>>      >     addresses the same or similar problems
>>      >
>>      >     - since not all of these draft try fit NRP into MNA, but 
>> specify
>>      >     independent solutions, which makes it an open issue if we
>>     want an MNA
>>      >     approach for this problem.
>>      >
>>      >     Aijun, does not suggest NOT adopting the draft, but point 
>> at some
>>      >     issues
>>      >     that should be cleared up before adoption.
>>      >
>>      >     /Loa
>>      >
>>      >     Den 29/04/2025 kl. 11:20, skrev Tianran Zhou:
>>      >      > Hi Joel,
>>      >      >
>>      >      > I think Aijun’s reply is to the cfa of 
>>  draft-li-mpls-mna-nrp-
>>      >     selector,
>>      >      > not the lc.
>>      >      >
>>      >      > Tianran
>>      >      >
>>      >      > *发件人:*Joel Halpern <[e-mail]
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>      >     <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>>
>>      >      > *发送时间:*2025年4月29日10:38
>>      >      > *收件人:*Aijun Wang <[e-mail]
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>      >     <mailto:[e-mail]
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]>>>; [e-mail]
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>      >     <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>      >      > *主题:*[mpls] Re: 答复: Working Group Adoption Poll for
>>     draft-li-
>>      >     mpls-
>>      >      > mna-nrp-selector
>>      >      >
>>      >      > Aijun, I posted a point-by-point technical rebuttl of the
>>     issues
>>      >     that
>>      >      > were raised.  Of those responses, there was some
>>     discussion that
>>      >     did not
>>      >      > actual prove there were issues for two of the points.  For
>>     the other
>>      >      > rebuttals, there was no response.  As far as I can tell,
>>     there is no
>>      >      > obstacle to the chairs calling for a WG last call.
>>      >      >
>>      >      > Now, having said that, I expect that issues will be raised
>>     if such a
>>      >      > last call takes place.  And those issues will be
>>     discussed.  And the
>>      >      > chairs will decide if the results of that discussion leads
>>     to a
>>      >      > successful or unsuccessful last call. That is in fact the
>>     purpose
>>      >     of a
>>      >      > last call.
>>      >      >
>>      >      > Yours,
>>      >      >
>>      >      > Joel
>>      >      >
>>      >      > On 4/28/2025 10:30 PM, Aijun Wang wrote:
>>      >      >
>>      >      >     Hi,
>>      >      >
>>      >      >     Given the intense discussions of this adoption 
>> call, the
>>      >     dispution
>>      >      >     of ISD/PSD, the ambiguous future of MNA based
>>     application, the
>>      >      >     transition of new MPLS WG etc, , I suggest to 
>> postpone the
>>      >     adoption
>>      >      >     call of this document.
>>      >      >
>>      >      >     The WG should provide the community, the operator the
>>     unified
>>      >      >     solution, not instead of some distinctive, proprietary
>>     solutions.
>>      >      >
>>      >      >     Some comprises should be coordinated.
>>      >      >
>>      >      >     PS.  I don’t like  John E. Drake’s tedious, “argument
>>     by emphatic
>>      >      >     assertion” (quote from his description to other 
>> persons).
>>      >      >
>>      >      >            Please state out your technical argument points
>>     once
>>      >     when you
>>      >      >     want to argue with others, or else, please stay in
>>     quiet and just
>>      >      >     listen to other experts’discussions.
>>      >      >
>>      >      >     Best Regards
>>      >      >
>>      >      >     Aijun Wang
>>      >      >
>>      >      >     China Telecom
>>      >      >
>>      >      >     *发件人:*[e-mail]
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>      >     <mailto:[e-mail]
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>      >      >     <mailto:[e-mail]
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>      >     <mailto:[e-mail]
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]>>>
>>      >      >     [mailto:[e-mail]
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>      >     <mailto:[e-mail]
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>      >      >     <mailto:[e-mail]
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>      >     <mailto:[e-mail]
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]>>>] *代表 *[e-mail]
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>      >     <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>      >      >     <mailto:[e-mail]
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]> <mailto:[e-mail]
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]>>>
>>      >      >     *发送时间:*2025年4月15日16:30
>>      >      >     *收件人:*[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>     <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>      >     <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>     <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>>
>>      >      >     *抄送:*[e-mail] <mailto:mpls-
>>     [e-mail]> <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:mpls-
>>     [e-mail]>>
>>      >     <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>     <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>>; 
>> draft-li-
>>      >      > [e-mail] <mailto:mpls-mna-nrp-
>>     [e-mail]> <mailto:mpls-mna-nrp- <mailto:mpls-mna-nrp->
>>      > [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> <mailto:draft-li-
>>     mpls-mna-nrp- <mailto:draft-li-mpls-mna-nrp-> <mailto:draft-li-
>>     <mailto:draft-li->
>>      >     mpls-mna-nrp->
>>      >      > [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>     <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>>
>>      >      >     *主题:*[mpls] Working Group Adoption Poll for draft-
>>     li-mpls-
>>      >     mna-nrp-
>>      >      >     selector
>>      >      >
>>      >      >     Dear WG,
>>      >      >
>>      >      >     This email starts a two-week poll on adopting draft-
>>     li-mpls-
>>      >     mna-nrp-
>>      >      >     selector as a MPLS working group document.
>>      >      >
>>      >      >     Please send your comments (support/not support) to the
>>     MPLS
>>      >     working
>>      >      >     group mailing list ([e-mail]
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]> <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>      >     <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>     <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>>).
>>      >      >
>>      >      >     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 three IPR disclosures against this document.
>>      >      >
>>      >      > https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?
>>     submit=draft&id=draft- <https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?
>>     submit=draft&id=draft->
>>      >     li- <https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?
>>     submit=draft&id=draft-li- <https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?
>>     submit=draft&id=draft-li->>
>>      >      >     mpls-mna-nrp-selector <https://datatracker.ietf.org/
>>     ipr/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/>
>>      >     search/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/ <https://
>>     datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/>>?
>>      >      >  submit=draft&id=draft-li-mpls-mna-nrp-selector>
>>      >      >
>>      >      >     All the authors/contributors have stated on the 
>> MPLS WG
>>      >     mailing list
>>      >      >     that they are unaware of any
>>      >      >
>>      >      >     undisclosed IPR that relates to this document.
>>      >      >
>>      >      >     This working group adoption poll ends April 29th, 
>> 2025.
>>      >      >
>>      >      >     Regards,
>>      >      >
>>      >      >     Nic (as MPLS WG Co-chair)
>>      >      >
>>      >      >
>>      >      >
>>      >      >  _______________________________________________
>>      >      >
>>      >      >     mpls mailing list -- [e-mail]
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]> <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>      >     <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>     <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>>
>>      >      >
>>      >      >     To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>      >     <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>     <mailto:mpls- <mailto:mpls-> <mailto:mpls- <mailto:mpls->>
>>      >      > [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>     <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>>
>>      >      >
>>      >      >
>>      >      > _______________________________________________
>>      >      > mpls mailing list -- [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>     <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>      >      > To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]> <mailto:mpls- <mailto:mpls->
>>      > [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>      >
>>      >     --
>>      >     Loa Andersson
>>      >     Senior MPLS Expert
>>      >     Bronze Dragon Consulting
>>      > [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> <mailto:[e-mail] 
>> <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>      > [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>     <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>      >
>>      >     _______________________________________________
>>      >     mpls mailing list -- [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>     <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>      >     To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]> <mailto:mpls- <mailto:mpls->
>>      > [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>      >
>>
>>     --     Loa Andersson
>>     Senior MPLS Expert
>>     Bronze Dragon Consulting
>>     [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>     [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>
>