Re: [sidr] Current document status && directionz

Declan Ma <madi@zdns.cn> Thu, 01 December 2016 06:59 UTC

Return-Path: <madi@zdns.cn>
X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B7B5129578 for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 22:59:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
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 8BnnZklzTudc for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 22:59:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gw1.turbomail.org (gw1.turbomail.org [159.8.83.126]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 40698129502 for <sidr@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 22:59:36 -0800 (PST)
X-TM-DID: 8d649d9c55f32e5150ff44f272d49a17
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=gb2312
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.1 \(3251\))
From: Declan Ma <madi@zdns.cn>
In-Reply-To: <CAL9jLaafREby=4D9EkYwuwvNkmzRSAuXUhGoY1mru0Lb3nJ+SQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 14:51:59 +0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <55A37339-61E6-4D44-A00C-8718A05584A1@zdns.cn>
References: <yj9ooa46aumt.wl%morrowc@ops-netman.net> <CAL9jLab3Sv6K5tmbERvFg8AzDdvPJ8Qtv_v++kn_vJd_bgbUmA@mail.gmail.com> <CAL9jLaafREby=4D9EkYwuwvNkmzRSAuXUhGoY1mru0Lb3nJ+SQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3251)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/mtQQgr6rNoHugmmkd8-3AvH6o_c>
Cc: Chris Morrow <morrowc@ops-netman.net>, sidr-ads@ietf.org, "sidr-chairs@ietf.org" <sidr-chairs@ietf.org>, "sidr@ietf.org" <sidr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [sidr] Current document status && directionz
X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing <sidr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sidr>, <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sidr/>
List-Post: <mailto:sidr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr>, <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2016 06:59:38 -0000

Chris,

I would like to take this thread to request for comments on how to move on SLURM.

During the Seoul meeting, Tim suggested moving it to SIDROPS since SIDR is being closed. 

Yet I had the impression that the AD hopes keeping the list/structure going until current work items are done. 

Considering the only issue facing SLURM is the file format that Tim and Rudiger mentioned in the MIC, IMHO, if this WG won’t plan to move SLURM to SIDROPS, WGLC is desirable to bring about inputs and comments to conclude this work.


Di 


> 在 2016年12月1日,02:33,Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>; 写道:
> 
> And again, restarting... post meeting and post travel refocusing :)
> 
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 11:35 AM, Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>; wrote:
> Restarting this thread, with some updates :)
> 
> Preparing for Seoul in a few weeks time, with the intent that we do not meet face-to-face in Chicago, have all current 'protocol' related docs to the IESG/done and meet instead in sidr-ops if there are agenda items at that time :)
> 
> Currently we have the following in IESG/pub-request status (13 documents):
> draft-ietf-sidr-adverse-actions
> draft-ietf-sidr-as-migration
> draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-algs
> draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-ops
> draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-overview
> draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-pki-profiles
> draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol
>     draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol (10/26 sent forward)
>  
> draft-ietf-sidr-origin-validation-signaling
> draft-ietf-sidr-publication
> draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-oob-setup
> draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-rtr-rfc6810-bis
> 
> 
> I had thought I sent validation-reconsidered forward for processing, I'm doing that today:
> draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered
> 
>  Currently still active documents (6 documents):
>  
> draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-rollover
> draft-ietf-sidr-lta-use-cases
> draft-ietf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light
> draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-tree-validation
> draft-ietf-sidr-rtr-keying
> draft-ietf-sidr-slurm
> 
> (this reflects the changes since the last email, included below)
> 
> I believe we're still planning to move (and have agreement from authors):
>  draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-rollover
>  draft-ietf-sidr-lta-use-cases
>  draft-ietf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light
>  draft-ietf-sidr-rtr-keying
>  
> draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-tree-validation
>  
> which leaves to be dealt with by Chicago 2 documents:
> draft-ietf-sidr-slurm
> 
> I think this is good, I believe (and of course I should be corrected if wrong)
>   slurm - more work inbound and discussion planned in Seoul
>   tree-validation - I thought moved to sidr-ops, but don't have docs to back that up.
> 
> 
> I still think this is good, I will be sending a request to the OPS-AD folk today to move:
>  draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-rollover
>  draft-ietf-sidr-lta-use-cases
>  draft-ietf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light
>  draft-ietf-sidr-rtr-keying
>  draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-tree-validation
> 
> to sidr-ops... If there are corrections/additions please send them along :)
> 
> -chris
>  
> -chris
> 
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 4:56 PM, Chris Morrow <morrowc@ops-netman.net>; wrote:
> 
> Howdy SIDR peeps,
> (+bonus ops ad)
> 
> Following on the Berlin meeting we were trying to accomplish two
> things:
> 
>   1) get all documents related to sidr protocols into wglc and then
>   publication
> 
>   2) get all documents which are more operationally focused moved
>   along to an ops group (sidr-ops or something akin to that)
> 
> With that in mind there are 8 documents in the publication queue:
>   draft-ietf-sidr-as-migration
>   draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-algs
>   draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-ops
>   draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-overview
>   draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-pki-profiles
>   draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol
>   draft-ietf-sidr-origin-validation-signaling
>   draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-rtr-rfc6810-bis
> 
> and 11 still in progress. Of the 11 left Sandy and I think they
> roughly break down like:
> 
> Documents which should move to the ops group:
>   draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-rollover
>   draft-ietf-sidr-lta-use-cases
>   draft-ietf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light - authors notified/queried about this
>   draft-ietf-sidr-rtr-keying
> 
> documents which should finish out in sidr:
>   draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol
>   draft-ietf-sidr-publication
>   draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-oob-setup - pub request in flight
>   draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-tree-validation
>   draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered
>   draft-ietf-sidr-slurm - authors recently updated
>   draft-ietf-sidr-adverse-actions - wglc imminent
> 
> I think if there's no meaningful discussion on change for these
> between now and 9/16/2016 (Sept 16th) we will assume this list is
> correct. For documents in the 'move' list, if progress to publication
> happens 'good!'. For all documents in the 'stays' list:
>   1) we aim to have wglc by Seoul
>   2) publication requests started on as many as possible
> 
> We plan to meet in Seoul, but not in Chicago (Mar 2017) where we
> expect the ops group to exist and meet. We can progress documents in
> SIDR after Seoul, but the WG should close out shortly after the new
> year. (or that's the goal).
> 
> Thoughts?
> -chris
> 
> _______________________________________________
> sidr mailing list
> sidr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> sidr mailing list
> sidr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr