Re: working group adoption poll for draft-mirsky-bfd-p2mp-vrrp-use-case

Chris Bowers <> Thu, 12 July 2018 16:32 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7987130E89; Thu, 12 Jul 2018 09:32:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NVU1zMFUkzCM; Thu, 12 Jul 2018 09:32:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2020E130EA6; Thu, 12 Jul 2018 09:32:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id c192-v6so15732408qkg.12; Thu, 12 Jul 2018 09:32:23 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=oVfQacmYCLH5w7A3AVJzI0kuAjKJcjWMYTA0EjcyZG0=; b=pjDvhUK0XvONj7mVYoEchr9h5mLM0e0gIY4VWlnCgWhwBZrQyNofTmK8L21zlaHYGt WpYO6HReiJ9wDqRhJwjKbYuC1ia/nVQSJRPa7gjHdL+BX6hMLAHpTaJ9ohIM53rR6odh 53/azxwTrnDXAJIIl+4W5/7dNlqGq/YL1SPkCzGUecsgXVEMqMKqvVUxlM65R1OGRlTG 3JVT/rhfd7yDZoJXc4MFhDIZHp0Wj8IlIXhqZEawjcXvqLw+SGE+QGyZgk5IH9QXJGe3 e4ctA/SoPzl0+NS0Ik/BszSkh2UHDf1EpGbkbYZhTtearVXdWme+RbfBMScI503sYT/b BR1w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=oVfQacmYCLH5w7A3AVJzI0kuAjKJcjWMYTA0EjcyZG0=; b=tCjrnfFUzBtqnkFfNvNtoWP48iPc3/XBW5+tjFZ3tSad1Q0MHSORVI/psTWAJOvTJr 4eT2FjpOwOiXbjF5KOx4fFvQ72xFNV+jhOj0ftbstTNGi68JM80idZte+FiYE8k/Nau+ 6Rb/F3ZEjbRrSsnhUfpHYQdGGG0H6+ESgOzs6DC4wUQJp/fVj3sJ2M9Ht/NnzyUSkNoO JGiqXoAnEKpUDKSWd9zHRTmQP+adZJ1UKtTd2Zu5ZN1ad5qO6ilCf7SqC30wVx0ggmNW kKFOQqqsFfYAWoM7Uxt+zRXldMNnCyYX64+NNr4sEhlg5AqtCKc0BIX3ibJePPQdXxez UFhQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlFWbTN2EQriX0A7OMMD/1A83sGcKRS85p1tlQqg0PjAWhKDvoo8 QV6wlAzCLvObkDqJH/EQa6TQM3tEFBZTyYEpGWk=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpfzbjZaRttTVSNE8EQD7nuHSxjXoY4v3R8qWCoLs5I11sKj9d57EILGDC9JaUWnD0uE0LU27mbkxoTSfmWHbIA=
X-Received: by 2002:a37:1845:: with SMTP id j66-v6mr2335633qkh.408.1531413142004; Thu, 12 Jul 2018 09:32:22 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 2002:ac8:2f95:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Thu, 12 Jul 2018 09:32:01 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <>
From: Chris Bowers <>
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2018 11:32:01 -0500
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: working group adoption poll for draft-mirsky-bfd-p2mp-vrrp-use-case
To: RTGWG <>,
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000005568df0570cfe852"
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
Precedence: list
List-Id: "RTG Area: Bidirectional Forwarding Detection DT" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2018 16:32:27 -0000


This WG adoption poll ended last Friday.

One author and one non-author expressed support for adoption,
while no one expressed opposition to adoption. This adoption poll did
not produce any discussion or detailed feedback from anyone about the
draft itself.

I think there needs to be more technical discussion about the mechanism
proposed in this draft on the RTGWG list before consensus can be judged
either way.  I would encourage anyone interested in working on the
mechanism proposed in this draft to provide detailed feedback on the list.


On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 11:46 AM, Chris Bowers <>

> The authors of draft-mirsky-bfd-p2mp-vrrp-use-case have requested
> that RTGWG adopt this draft as a WG document.
> Please indicate whether or not you support adoption of the draft
> as a WG document.  An explanation of why or why not is also very helpful.
> The two authors have already indicated that they know of no relevant IPR
> other than what has already been disclosed. The draft has two IPR
> disclosures.
> For some history related to this draft, please see:
> For information about IPR in IETF technology, see RFC 8179.
> Note that one of the basic principles regarding how the IETF deals with
> IPR claims (from RFC 8179)
> is that: "The IETF will make no determination about the validity of any
> particular IPR claim."
> Since Jeff Tantsura is a co-author, he will not be involved in judging
> consensus.
> The closing date for this poll is Friday, July 6th.
> Thanks,
> Chris