IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Pce] Adoption Poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-l2-flowspec

julien.meuric@orange.com Thu, 06 January 2022 12:57 UTC

Return-Path: <julien.meuric@orange.com>
X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FC2B3A0AC1 for <pce@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Jan 2022 04:57:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.813
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.813 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.714, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=orange.com
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 2eKHBbsGjd-L for <pce@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Jan 2022 04:57:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from relais-inet.orange.com (relais-inet.orange.com [80.12.66.39]) (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 36E4D3A0ABC for <pce@ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Jan 2022 04:57:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from opfedar01.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by opfedar26.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTPS id 4JV5wZ1qnlzFpq2 for <pce@ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Jan 2022 13:57:18 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=orange.com; s=ORANGE001; t=1641473838; bh=hvSGldRB+UJwM4nAAB6xbXlQLO27O68zes3mRv/yzdY=; h=Subject:To:From:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=k2/l0vLQLXjFOEDLmenHUDfMkaG9fm8Y28iWPNFcso5bLmKHKiAxS1pnwxb5Dbpug q7lnUzfhfLV6f/lG5dNPr7RRybV0MCLKWNGycGWtGLXhwwD60om/cdvsD7AGmRFnz3 OAccO5HC2vRAlcix3ZeDvpO4Z9/sHIkVXmuFznvpG66MlHm7bOEfj5Tt+btboVObgd wGhSVRliuaeMfSjYb8kXM9SsLDFpCQ7wtdslgz5vliG83bupsRwVmkdSFi6csrCchX xtyFJGmtHF6Pz2fBN2a4Mee6/OHp+56tLAWXcJcuFL4n/3AzRjaXHgU65Rgw/mrK8N AzTtIflFRCvuA==
To: pce@ietf.org
References: <7f6f43c7-06fd-bc5c-97ce-12db83042c0f@orange.com>
From: julien.meuric@orange.com
Organization: Orange
Message-ID: <5a43d086-fb61-5341-3bdf-1fa687e726f5@orange.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2022 13:57:15 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <7f6f43c7-06fd-bc5c-97ce-12db83042c0f@orange.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha-256"; boundary="------------ms020009000005060600070006"
X-Originating-IP: [10.115.27.52]
X-ClientProxiedBy: OPE16NORMBX508.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup (10.115.27.28) To OPE16NORMBX105.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup (10.115.27.2)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/5IFRhqGPAZcNWHEsORqAMLhsX-w>
Subject: Re: [Pce] Adoption Poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-l2-flowspec
X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Path Computation Element <pce.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pce>, <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pce/>
List-Post: <mailto:pce@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce>, <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2022 12:57:25 -0000

Hi all and best wishes for 2022.

Gentle reminder: we started a poll some days before Christmas. If it was 
pure new work, I'd assume there isn't enough interest yet. Since it's 
pre-existing work that has been split to catch up with another WG's work 
in progress, I'd feel more comfortable to get some explicit feedback.

Thanks,

Julien


On 16/12/2021 17:49, julien.meuric@orange.com wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This message is the following step to the situation previously 
> summarized by Dhruv [1].
>
> As a result, do you believe that draft-li-pce-pcep-l2-flowspec [2] is 
> a right foundation to become (again) a PCE WG item?
>
> Please respond to the PCE list, including any comment you may feel 
> useful, especially in case of negative answer.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Julien
>
> (As a reminder, Dhruv recused himself from the administrative process.)
>
> -- 
>
> [1] 
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/4f8f_3Qs_uA3T16CTCAsoOJnt58/
> [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-pce-pcep-l2-flowspec/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email