Re: [spring] Progressing Standardizing SR over IPv6 compression

Joel Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com> Fri, 20 August 2021 19:18 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 430CE3A246C for <spring@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Aug 2021 12:18:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.101
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.101 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, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, 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 VJ5e1bWAg4J9 for <spring@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Aug 2021 12:17:59 -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 CB8D03A2468 for <spring@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Aug 2021 12:17:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by maila2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4Grrxz0pN0z6GRDH for <spring@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Aug 2021 12:17:59 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelhalpern.com; s=2.tigertech; t=1629487079; bh=KYhacfkG+heFqIggzc8/C4oI6K6DqWTllQar1Ja0yg4=; h=Subject:From:To:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=fM+70iSvRTaG+TDE6RLuA/6R3dWtLyi+9Jff/RY3MNwo80MfViCFEEhnoiDubVVDj a+92C/RsMZPuPJO2Mm2+r7av5U//IdzQTwffk9k5TqnmKSa745VqOJKN8IxKUsCwyZ BW0PnVY7LLzS9bPucUfIUVGufY81PtYT375BgaHE=
X-Quarantine-ID: <ff7cN1htIPUe>
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at a2.tigertech.net
Received: from [192.168.23.64] (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 4Grrxy4T3Sz6GRD4 for <spring@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Aug 2021 12:17:58 -0700 (PDT)
From: Joel Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
To: "spring@ietf.org" <spring@ietf.org>
References: <4c03c28c-2b7d-0a90-c2bb-5fff53d0bc4c@joelhalpern.com>
Message-ID: <4d81c9d3-748a-6e40-bd80-98a081e65d91@joelhalpern.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2021 15:17:56 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4c03c28c-2b7d-0a90-c2bb-5fff53d0bc4c@joelhalpern.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/Hft0f7JbeCKY9agRkYIHEBAXy3k>
Subject: Re: [spring] Progressing Standardizing SR over IPv6 compression
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: Fri, 20 Aug 2021 19:18:05 -0000

Thank you to everyone who has replied to our request for WG feedback. As 
soon as the chairs have had a chance to consult, we will let you know 
what the next steps are.

Yours
Joel, Jim, and Bruno

On 8/4/2021 2:52 PM, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
> The SPRING Working Group Chairs thank the design team for their efforts 
> on the requirements and analysis drafts.  The question of how the 
> working group wants to progress that part of the work will be the topic 
> for a separate email a bit later.
> 
> Right now, we are hearing the discussion about how many solutions, and 
> the perspectives being expressed.  While the topic was well-raised, the 
> discussion to date has not been structured in a way that makes clear to 
> everyone what the purpose is.  In particular, the chairs have decided to 
> re-ask the question.  We ask that even those who have responded in the 
> discussion respond to this thread.  Preferably with both what their 
> opinion is and an explanation of why.
> 
> The question we are asking you to comment on is:
> 
> Should the working group standardize one data plane behavior for 
> compressing SRv6 information?
> 
> Please speak up.  We are looking to collect responses until close of 
> business PDT on 20-August-2021.
> 
> Thank you,
> Joel, Jim, and Bruno
> 
> _______________________________________________
> spring mailing list
> spring@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring