[spring] Error / Calls regarding adoption of draft-ietf-spring-sr-redundancy-protection

"Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com> Tue, 28 September 2021 12:07 UTC

Return-Path: <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
X-Original-To: spring@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spring@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28CD23A2B4D for <spring@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Sep 2021 05:07:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=joelhalpern.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 00f98yrpEdVW for <spring@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Sep 2021 05:07:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from maila2.tigertech.net (maila2.tigertech.net [208.80.4.152]) (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 B41AE3A2B45 for <spring@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Sep 2021 05:07:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by maila2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4HJdYQ4RVbz6GMTM for <spring@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Sep 2021 05:07:38 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelhalpern.com; s=2.tigertech; t=1632830858; bh=TiYGa+wj0+6PBqac+u5oeKdZtWbvvhO+qzWWsGGgzqY=; h=To:From:Subject:Date:From; b=ZQilI0R6s6mXl1fRnU2L5rZcqjsaYl7IIc0UJ1x+ib/vSk5kcN1f7+ouXkC/Oa/Wv n93KbWJ6FwMyir+wlRaqxfu2Bwiagcc5Okvz5oU04R2ytu1OL6pRIh2wYUdzlkbama Dz2q087zn/G+UvLAK3swtDR4xEEZq2J9pWyRluVE=
X-Quarantine-ID: <UIGhjYjo1PpM>
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at a2.tigertech.net
Received: from [192.168.22.111] (50-233-136-230-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [50.233.136.230]) (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 maila2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4HJdYQ1J93z6G97v for <spring@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Sep 2021 05:07:37 -0700 (PDT)
To: "spring@ietf.org" <spring@ietf.org>
From: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
Message-ID: <cfc0d02a-8931-14be-8768-e62f2ff0e5fa@joelhalpern.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2021 08:07:35 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.14.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/6dsTsmO0AJzpWC_F4I0UNVTOABE>
Subject: [spring] Error / Calls regarding adoption of draft-ietf-spring-sr-redundancy-protection
X-BeenThere: spring@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Source Packet Routing in NetworkinG \(SPRING\)" <spring.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spring>, <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/spring/>
List-Post: <mailto:spring@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring>, <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2021 12:07:52 -0000

Oops.  The chairs declared adoption  of what is now published as 
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-spring-sr-redundancy-protection> 
without a proper adoption call.  We suspect that adoption is okay with 
the WG, but we need to make sure. Does anyone object to the adoption of 
this document by the WG?  If there is significant objection we will 
determine what steps to take.  Remember that wanting changes in the 
document does not require revoking the adoption if you feel the basic 
approach is what the WG wants to use as a basis for work on this topic 
going forward.

Also, would the authors please confirm to the list that all relevant 
known IPR has been disclosed.

Please respond if you are an author or have concerns.
Thank you,
Joel, Bruno, and Jim