Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement - draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-analysis

"" <> Tue, 19 October 2021 01:24 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AD5D3A0D3E for <>; Mon, 18 Oct 2021 18:24:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.89
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.89 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Bu_uauaHmW2Q for <>; Mon, 18 Oct 2021 18:23:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E30463A0D41 for <>; Mon, 18 Oct 2021 18:23:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from LAPTOP-NAK0KB4A (unknown []) by app1 (Coremail) with SMTP id H0IICgB3f1cdHm5hOWQNAA--.12513S2; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 09:23:41 +0800 (CST)
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2021 09:23:40 +0800
From: "" <>
To: "'SPRING WG List'" <>
References: <15436_1631020356_61376544_15436_364_1_53C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A4CE99E43@OPEXCAUBM43.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
X-Priority: 3
X-Has-Attach: no
X-Mailer: Foxmail[cn]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_001_NextPart051033802627_=----"
X-CM-TRANSID: H0IICgB3f1cdHm5hOWQNAA--.12513S2
X-Coremail-Antispam: 1UD129KBjvJXoWxGF4kKFyfAr4xCF18uFy5CFg_yoW5tFykpa yUKr17Crs5A348C3WrAr18ZryxArZ5GFWUC3W5Kry8Ja45GF18Kr1ftw4YvayDGr1fJayY qrsruw1DXws0vFJanT9S1TB71UUUUUUqnTZGkaVYY2UrUUUUjbIjqfuFe4nvWSU5nxnvy2 9KBjDU0xBIdaVrnRJUUU9Fb7Iv0xC_Cr1lb4IE77IF4wAFF20E14v26r1j6r4UM7CY07I2 0VC2zVCF04k26cxKx2IYs7xG6rWj6s0DM7CIcVAFz4kK6r1j6r18M28lY4IEw2IIxxk0rw A2F7IY1VAKz4vEj48ve4kI8wA2z4x0Y4vE2Ix0cI8IcVAFwI0_tr0E3s1l84ACjcxK6xII jxv20xvEc7CjxVAFwI0_Cr1j6rxdM28EF7xvwVC2z280aVAFwI0_GcCE3s1l84ACjcxK6I 8E87Iv6xkF7I0E14v26rxl6s0DM2AIxVAIcxkEcVAq07x20xvEncxIr21l5I8CrVAYj202 j2C_Gr0_Xr1l5I8CrVAqjxCE14ACF2xKxwAqx4xG64kEw2xG04xIwI0_Jr0_Gr1l5I8CrV CF0I0E4I0vr24l5I8CrVC2j2CEjI02ccxYII8I67AEr4CY67k08wAv7VC0I7IYx2IY67AK xVWUJVWUGwAv7VC2z280aVAFwI0_Jr0_Gr1lOx8S6xCaFVCjc4AY6r1j6r4UMxkIecxEwV Cm-wCFx2IqxVCFs4IE7xkEbVWUJVW8JwC20s026c02F40E14v26r106r1rMI8I3I0E7480 Y4vE14v26r106r1rMI8E67AF67kF1VAFwI0_Jr0_JrylIxAIcVC0I7IYx2IY67AKxVWUJV WUCwCI42IY6xIIjxv20xvEc7CjxVAFwI0_Jr0_Gr1lIxAIcVCF04k26cxKx2IYs7xG6r1j 6r1xMIIF0xvEx4A2jsIE14v26r1j6r4UMIIF0xvEx4A2jsIEc7CjxVAFwI0_Jr0_GrUvcS sGvfC2KfnxnUUI43ZEXa7IU8OzV5UUUUU==
X-CM-SenderInfo: p2kd0wxhqjquhdlf3hldfou0/
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement - draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-analysis
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Source Packet Routing in NetworkinG \(SPRING\)" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2021 01:24:07 -0000

I support the CSID adoption.
CSID is the right direction for SRv6 compression. I see many vendors have implemented CSID, especially REPLACE-CSID Flavor, and the interoperability test had been made long time ago in different labs, so I believe the mechanism has been mature. Regarding the issues discussed in the threads, they can be addressed following the processing.
Again, thanks to Chairs and Design team.
Best regards,
Zhao Feng

Zhao Feng
Internet Center, Research Institute of Technology and Standard, China Academy of Information and Communication Technology

China TTL Labs
Add: Building Block B-608, No.52 HuaYuan North Road Beijing, P.R.China, 100191
Tel: 86-10-62300055
Mobile: 8613601068212
Fax: 86-10-62300094

Date: 2021-09-07 21:12
Subject: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement - draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-analysis
Dear WG,
The Design Team has produced two documents:
- A requirement document: draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement 
- A solution analysis document: draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-analysis
Both have been presented to the WG and triggered some discussions but are still individual documents.
We believe it's now time for the WG to consider taking ownership of those two documents.
Note that, especially for those two documents, WG adoption does not necessarily mean RFC publication in particular if it turns out that the benefit of long term archive would not justify the WG and IESG effort to finalize those two documents.
This message starts a 2 week WG adoption call, ending September  20th 2021, for:
After review of the document(s) please indicate support (or not) for WG adoption of the document(s) to the mailing list.
Please also provide comments/reasons for your support (or lack thereof) as this is a stronger way to indicate your (non) support as this is not a vote.
If you are willing to work on the document(s), please state this explicitly. This gives the chairs an indication of the energy level of people in the working group willing to work on the document. 
Jim, Bruno & Joel
Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.