IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Adoption request: draft-li-arch-sat

Hesham ElBakoury <helbakoury@gmail.com> Wed, 03 April 2024 11:39 UTC

Return-Path: <helbakoury@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 183AAC1519B8 for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Apr 2024 04:39:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.095
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.095 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JN9hqzSAazsV for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Apr 2024 04:39:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pj1-x1035.google.com (mail-pj1-x1035.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1035]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 66D76C14CE30 for <rtgwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Apr 2024 04:39:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pj1-x1035.google.com with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-2a297378cf0so416371a91.1 for <rtgwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 03 Apr 2024 04:39:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1712144341; x=1712749141; darn=ietf.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Ix/sjf8IUiac+1/B/1iuLvvOa+Zun+tVbHH/9vUOFIA=; b=abm+oMudtyVAzXJw1hbCmJ7pcJycVRcTZg4eYcOBSL4BFFrRZ3O1oeWxvOxAHQfhuI X5/LIIRK5/JnUYuwl58kMLcG5FHKQ3Wol/S9iOY3nT+qARaLal7VV1wuPelIEN+HmpQt FH071pjPYn3oFFZDz4vQLmqR6SeL/w+FTUp2daWMlqOxCTOihrHxQ6RDb3fTt5WyXk+U Q2pNFhu7MoxDR4cglWSQxGpDtRs9VqQ1PHxVkcleQS7Ds3CBF2ikCG0B3P0E2inIcEbe lrMVlTNXv34QFmCummacVqSks6vOearwoPaPqu1pxMUc2bsz5H4LFeS79jWC3lMdCZ/C 8c/w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1712144341; x=1712749141; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=Ix/sjf8IUiac+1/B/1iuLvvOa+Zun+tVbHH/9vUOFIA=; b=rrcE8P1pEKu2Z0UMOZ8qUnbKyaOnecA29gHy5lQzHSrmVsHNlT4FZLjy96aUGjQOoN qwgYc4nKko9Eg59ay3dh6mpnUosTn5xajvk9fdmAdbq/iJoTniyQrw3cG8XjnRwF4f3y 8o403zspCyacdNXdzdcfiLgSvzyQByg8ty7a4Iw+DonE/QVGXYugsjLn6/rrIgRq//un 4pmxySEg0IvGGN/EgFLmjTqgH19PGWgXZcU22VzKiKwg9YJMq23Uggcc5JdDth96kjfX FibCoKpJsym/d9JldFZd03LnqmQZPusljRsLIcMlyAECXW6DQsTdlaLQRMvOJrdsknXJ dYKA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxSaLJJTKHiLDmoO+8GL15fymqNZcOj6IAqN/rl/CXmm50YDlvK zyYPP78cAoj9AN+fk8l4ZJwLpVy4TEEdLrDVaTkfXgrH5gVNock80NrbZKjcZw0FefbBQo23a6O Z5vISfmG+NZOI+FiCnbuo4tPmCO4=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFldXBIKuoTWqiHOakakrX/jE7TaMvAoiD/S2INSXKOoXx6v2ZJrvOZzDfoyz8p9Cj5Puw7TYzYstspejCn8q0=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:19d2:b0:2a2:6248:6bc1 with SMTP id nm18-20020a17090b19d200b002a262486bc1mr4266491pjb.34.1712144341387; Wed, 03 Apr 2024 04:39:01 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAFvDQ9p1gZJ9oFSBvPEFK5KbTGz1-QD0BqQJy_D6Q=58w6K0pA@mail.gmail.com> <65A5C87A-7F22-4582-9492-766BCC1C74ED@gmail.com> <CAMMESszNGaoL5kdP4=fNeav=re40du-CKf7VeLW_VH+Yn-vuxQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAFvDQ9q_YBVA_FMMGRObkaeBHGp1ks0t0JU+zR3C4swYiLfm4Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAMMESsyYkGXGwc3enC4LKEsBi5tbz+R_mbpu2n_hsOKBBDDhfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAFvDQ9q8GH8Ox=BKwQGu70BZ1oGxtW1ZLvMScHQvLUkT_yOSSg@mail.gmail.com> <A47023D8-0CF5-481B-A5C3-28A80F0906F2@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <A47023D8-0CF5-481B-A5C3-28A80F0906F2@gmail.com>
From: Hesham ElBakoury <helbakoury@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2024 04:38:49 -0700
Message-ID: <CAFvDQ9pOe=QmjsoWZMWd66-yKfGy4mbc62fYYOchU8+ssv=N3Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Adoption request: draft-li-arch-sat
To: Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
Cc: Routing WG <rtgwg@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000045d52b06152fab4f"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtgwg/eBrLHUGKtBpiqYqmtI6Au-Ex2ZM>
X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Area Working Group <rtgwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtgwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtgwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2024 11:39:03 -0000

This is an informational draft, why worry about deployment? Perhaps I am
missing something here.

Thanks
Hesham

On Wed, Apr 3, 2024, 3:43 AM Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
wrote:

> It is not the lack of expertise that worries me so much as the low
> probability of deployment without interest by either a major operator or a
> regulator.
>
> If this was an IRTF project I would be less concerned.
>
> Stewart
>
> On 2 Apr 2024, at 22:50, Hesham ElBakoury <helbakoury@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Alvaro,
> My understanding from RF8789 is that it requires WG last call but not
> rough consensus. I am also not clear on how you measure rough consensus?
>
> I think the *sat-int* email list has satellites experts who can provide
> their feedback. If this not the case, and if RTGWG does not have satellites
> experts, then how we can make well-informed decision about this draft
> without asking for help from external reviewers who can join the RTGWG if
> needed.
>
> Thanks
> Hesham
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 2, 2024, 1:21 PM Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On April 2, 2024 at 3:10:09 PM, Hesham ElBakoury wrote:
>>
>> Hesham:
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> > Can we get external reviewers to look at this draft?
>>
>> That's a question for the chairs.
>>
>> Given that all IETF stream documents require consensus (rfc8789), I
>> don't know how an external review figures into that.
>>
>>
>> Alvaro.
>>
>>
>> > On Tue, Apr 2, 2024, 7:49 AM Alvaro Retana wrote:
>> > > Hi!
>> > >
>> > > I have the same concerns as Stewart.
>> > >
>> > > We don’t have the experience or expertise to review the document,
>> > > including the assumptions. This topic is interesting, but without the
>> > > ability to review it properly, I don’t think this draft (or any other
>> > > related work) should be adopted.
>> > >
>> > > Alvaro.
>>
> _______________________________________________
> rtgwg mailing list
> rtgwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtgwg mailing list
> rtgwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email