Re: [spring] WG Adoption call for https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-filsfilscheng-spring-srv6-srh-compression/

[Ahmed Bashandy <[e-mail]>]

I support the adoption of this document.

  * The network programming model (RFC8986) defines multiple behaviors,
    CSID is just adding the next and replace flavors
  * The draft proposes a single SRv6 based data plane that defines next
    and replace behaviors. IMO that is consistent with RFC8986

  * CSID has been recommended by the design team for SRv6 based compression
  * Interop was done. That is more evidence that CSID is a single data
    plane solution
  * IMO CSID is ready to become the basis for the SRv6 compression solution
  * Being an SRv6 data plane-based solution, CSID is coherent with the
    one data plane solution objective
  * CSID meets SRv6 compression requirements as single solution


Thanks


Ahmed


On 10/1/21 7:04 AM, James Guichard wrote:
>
> Dear WG:
>
> The chairs would like to express their appreciation for all the 
> responses received to our emails with reference to how the working 
> group wishes to move forward with respect to a solution for SRv6 
> compression.
>
> The apparent inclination of the working group is to use 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-filsfilscheng-spring-srv6-srh-compression/ 
> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-filsfilscheng-spring-srv6-srh-compression/> 
> as the basis for its compression standardization work. That is part of 
> what this email attempts to confirm.
>
> Because of the above the chairs would like to issue a 2-week WG call 
> for adoption ending October 15^th for 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-filsfilscheng-spring-srv6-srh-compression/ 
> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-filsfilscheng-spring-srv6-srh-compression/> 
> but with some clear guidelines as follows. By expressing support for 
> adoption of this document you are fully aware of and are acknowledging 
> that:
>
>  1. The SPRING working group is adopting a document that has multiple
>     SRv6 Endpoint behaviors.
>  2. The document is a “living” document; it may change as it goes
>     through review and analysis by the SPRING working group.
>  3. All open discussion points raised on our mailing list MUST be
>     addressed BEFORE said document is allowed to progress from the
>     working group to publication. A list of these discussion points
>     will be documented in the WG document and maintained by the
>     document editor in conjunction with the chairs.
>  4. If this document is adopted by the working group, the chairs
>     specify as part of the adoption call that the following text
>     describing an open issue be added to the document in the
>     above-described open issues section:
>       * "Given that the working group has said that it wants to
>         standardize one data plane solution, and given that the
>         document contains multiple SRv6 EndPoint behaviors that some
>         WG members have stated are multiple data plane solutions, the
>         working group will address whether this is valid and coherent
>         with its one data plane solution objective.".
>
> Please consider the above guidelines as you decide on whether to 
> support or not this WG adoption. Please express clearly your reasoning 
> for support/non-support as well as any open discussion points you 
> would like addressed should the document be adopted into the working 
> group.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Jim, Bruno & Joel
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> spring mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring