Re: [spring] Conclusion from WG poll on dataplane solution for compressing segment routing over IPv6

[Tony Li <[e-mail]>]

Dear chairs & WG,


> Our thanks to the working group members for speaking up clearly.  There is a rough (quite clear) consensus for standardizing one dataplane solution to compressing segment routing over IPv6.


I’m very pleased that we’ve found the courage to say that we want to make a decision.


> As chairs, there are some related observations we need to make.
> There appears to be significant interest in using the framework in the CSID draft for addressing the above.


I concur that there is interest in CSID.  However, as we have not yet done a consensus check to select the specific proposal, I hope that this is not your assertion that CSID is the result. This is a major decision by the WG and it does deserve a formal and explicit check.


> However, before we issue a call for adoption on that, the chairs would like to understand how the working group wants to solve a technical problem.  The CSID draft contains two dataplane solutions.  The above rough consensus is for one dataplane solution.  Does the working group want to choose one?  Do the authors want to suggest that one of the two is the one we should standardize, and get working group agreement?
> Should we adopt the document, with a note indicating the problem, and solve the problem afterwards?  (That itself does not solve the problem, it merely kicks it down the road.) Do folks see another means to avoid putting the WG in conflict with itself?


If the authors of the CSID proposal, or any proposal, would like to revise their proposals before we make a selection, this would seem to be an opportune time.

Tony