[spring] Summay of the SRCOMP design team

Weiqiang Cheng <chengweiqiang@chinamobile.com> Sat, 17 July 2021 02:07 UTC

Return-Path: <chengweiqiang@chinamobile.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 338A63A1616; Fri, 16 Jul 2021 19:07:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.788
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.788 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no 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 SfKgSJrrrkpi; Fri, 16 Jul 2021 19:07:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cmccmta3.chinamobile.com (cmccmta3.chinamobile.com [221.176.66.81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A5873A1613; Fri, 16 Jul 2021 19:07:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from spf.mail.chinamobile.com (unknown[172.16.121.7]) by rmmx-syy-dmz-app11-12011 (RichMail) with SMTP id 2eeb60f23b53538-147a7; Sat, 17 Jul 2021 10:07:18 +0800 (CST)
X-RM-TRANSID: 2eeb60f23b53538-147a7
X-RM-TagInfo: emlType=0
X-RM-SPAM-FLAG: 00000000
Received: from cmcc (unknown[10.1.6.6]) by rmsmtp-syy-appsvr04-12004 (RichMail) with SMTP id 2ee460f23b54ea8-ae163; Sat, 17 Jul 2021 10:07:17 +0800 (CST)
X-RM-TRANSID: 2ee460f23b54ea8-ae163
From: "Weiqiang Cheng" <chengweiqiang@chinamobile.com>
To: <spring@ietf.org>
Cc: <spring-chairs@ietf.org>, <srcomp@ietf.org>
Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2021 10:07:33 +0800
Message-ID: <03c001d77ab0$81ec2a90$85c47fb0$@com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_03C1_01D77AF3.900F6A90"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: Add6sIFVh/o7ZErwT02Qgg4tFSsk0A==
Content-Language: zh-cn
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/rsdrID2TqXnNgQmSoqi37ASbgEI>
Subject: [spring] Summay of the SRCOMP design team
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: Sat, 17 Jul 2021 02:07:43 -0000

Dear all,

After a year of hard working, the SRCOMP design team almost completed the
expected tasks, and here we would like to make a brief summary.

 

The goal of the design team

The design team's goal is to produce (rough) consensus (of the DT) outputs
to the WG on two related topics [1]:

1) What are the requirements for solutions to compressed segment routing
information for use over IPv6;

2) An analysis of proposed approaches to compressing         segment routing
information for use over IPv6.

 

What we have achieved:

The DT members have exchanged over 1000 emails in the mailing list since the
first email sent in SRCOMP mailing list at July 17th, 2020 [2]. After nearly
100 meetings (once or twice meeting per week at the past year), the DT
members finally generated the required two documents as planned. The first
revision of draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement[3] was submitted
at Oct 30th,  2020, and the first revision of
draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-analysis [4] was submitted at Feb 19th,
2021.

 

After several updates, the complete and stable revision of the
requirements[3] and analysis drafts[4] had been updated at July 8th , 2021. 

 

We believe the content of these two drafts can be a good input to the SPRING
WG. Many thanks for the patience from anybody. 

 

Acknowledgements:

We would like to thank all the members of the design team:

Ron Bonica(Juniper), Weiqiang Cheng(China Mobile), Darren Dukes(Cisco), Wim
Henderickx(Nokia),Cheng Li(Huawei), Shaofu Peng(ZTE),Sander Steffann(SJM
Steffann), and Chongfeng Xie(China Telecom) (in alphabetical order) 

 

Next Step:

Looking forward to the comments for the requirements draft[3] and analysis
draft[4].

 

 

[1].
<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/e-c
98UhIyMu7MmLuTXvBE2cXCug/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!SfCb0RFxXj2ZhKjlnZuFLcISvmu6xpRkrt
we6QKtF2Ilb3HkssWQkssu7mddigOV$>
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/e-c98UhIyMu7MmLuTXvBE2cXCug/

[2].
<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/srcomp/
__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!SfCb0RFxXj2ZhKjlnZuFLcISvmu6xpRkrtwe6QKtF2Ilb3HkssWQkssu7lG
PpV6y$> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/srcomp/

[3].
<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-srcompdt-
spring-compression-requirement__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!SfCb0RFxXj2ZhKjlnZuFLcISvmu6x
pRkrtwe6QKtF2Ilb3HkssWQkssu7j8Fjyrm$>
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-requireme
nt

[4].
<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-srcompdt-
spring-compression-analysis__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!SfCb0RFxXj2ZhKjlnZuFLcISvmu6xpRk
rtwe6QKtF2Ilb3HkssWQkssu7tpAwlvQ$>
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-analysis

 

 

 

Best regards,

Weiqiang Cheng on behalf of SRCOMP design team