IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [spring] Working Group Adoption Call for draft-filsfils-spring-segment-routing-policy

"Nagendra Kumar Nainar (naikumar)" <naikumar@cisco.com> Tue, 22 May 2018 11:32 UTC

Return-Path: <naikumar@cisco.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 C9F3212EB14 for <spring@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 May 2018 04:32:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.509
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.509 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 GmrN1lijvDgC for <spring@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 May 2018 04:32:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-2.cisco.com (alln-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.142.89]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B309C12EB12 for <spring@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 May 2018 04:32:56 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=11246; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1526988776; x=1528198376; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: mime-version; bh=5UxXd0yVTVPEVjCBPFALfzPAiOddqYzFvAxprC1uRMw=; b=Xsqas0/MBYWAlE7AfeWqoq0ov7wlnBOY1Wuh3inCKpi2J1S7AU38Nptf kl7VMq8CYt7qt5htC7fFkrmUWRvPWVaYoZ9+7U05jqf31RXVJNp5Sdc+3 XsVlP3UO+ugbubMBDTeuDPEXK6bMF6okE7ZprmjqJAIU951Y672MgNtys k=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0C3AADs/gNb/40NJK1dGQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQcBAQEBAYJNdmJ9KAqDa4gEjHeBeYEPjj+EdxSBDgNTC4RsAhqCBiE0GAECAQEBAQEBAmwohSgBAQEBAx0GTxcCAQgRAwECKwICAjAdCAIEARKDIgKBG2SoQYIchFiDbYIPiDWCE4EzgmmEQAESAT+CYDCCJAKIKJAnCQKOVYE3g26HWZBTAhETAYEkARw4Jg0ucXAVOyoBghgJgj+OBm+MJ4EfgRgBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.49,430,1520899200"; d="scan'208,217";a="118158367"
Received: from alln-core-8.cisco.com ([173.36.13.141]) by alln-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 22 May 2018 11:32:55 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-013.cisco.com (xch-rcd-013.cisco.com [173.37.102.23]) by alln-core-8.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w4MBWt3Z015911 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 22 May 2018 11:32:55 GMT
Received: from xch-rcd-015.cisco.com (173.37.102.25) by XCH-RCD-013.cisco.com (173.37.102.23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Tue, 22 May 2018 06:32:55 -0500
Received: from xch-rcd-015.cisco.com ([173.37.102.25]) by XCH-RCD-015.cisco.com ([173.37.102.25]) with mapi id 15.00.1320.000; Tue, 22 May 2018 06:32:55 -0500
From: "Nagendra Kumar Nainar (naikumar)" <naikumar@cisco.com>
To: Rob Shakir <robjs@google.com>, SPRING WG List <spring@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [spring] Working Group Adoption Call for draft-filsfils-spring-segment-routing-policy
Thread-Index: AQHT7SmI9bqai5uy6UmA/v61MqtnY6Q7t68A
Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 11:32:54 +0000
Message-ID: <9819D13D-6FCB-415B-8C50-11AC07BB3C44@cisco.com>
References: <CAHd-QWsZrcdJZnnJvDCpS_RqQ1e068FTUo0Rvh8s+C2zoiuy_A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHd-QWsZrcdJZnnJvDCpS_RqQ1e068FTUo0Rvh8s+C2zoiuy_A@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/10.a.0.180210
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.118.20.6]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_9819D13D6FCB415B8C5011AC07BB3C44ciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/AOh6ym85WT9maa2weVFCYHJ6naU>
Subject: Re: [spring] Working Group Adoption Call for draft-filsfils-spring-segment-routing-policy
X-BeenThere: spring@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 22 May 2018 11:32:59 -0000

Hi,

I support WG adoption for this document

Thanks,
Nagendra

From: spring <spring-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Rob Shakir <robjs@google.com>
Date: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 at 11:21 AM
To: SPRING WG List <spring@ietf.org>
Subject: [spring] Working Group Adoption Call for draft-filsfils-spring-segment-routing-policy

Hi SPRING WG,

This email initiates a two week call for working group adoption for draft-filsfils-spring-segment-routing-policy. Please indicate your support, or otherwise, for adopting this draft as a working group item by 30th May 2018. We are particularly interested in hearing from working group members that are not co-authors of this draft.

As part of the discussions of adopting this draft into SPRING with the ADs and chairs of other WGs, there are a number of requests to the authors.

1. Please clarify in the text traffic steering with "SR policy" and its relationship to other traffic engineering functions. It seems to me that this work is generally describing how one selects and steers traffic into policies, rather than path calculation. Additional clarification of whether this is the case (or not), would be welcome to ensure that the relationship with other work is clear. We would ask the authors to consider whether sections 14.1-14.4 are required scope of this document.

2.. Consider what the core content of this document is, and how it can be make as concise and clear as possible. There are some specific suggestions that can be made here, but we would like to see this discussed with the working group.

Additionally, there are currently 17 authors listed on this document. Please trim this to <= 5 front-page authors, utilising a "Contributors" section if required for the others.. An approach to achieving this would be to list ~2 editors as the front-page authors.

In parallel to this adoption call, I will send an IPR call for this document. We will need all 17 authors to confirm their IPR position on this document.

Thanks,
Bruno & Rob.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email