[Teas] Re: [spring] Call for adoption: draft-beeram-mpls-rsvp-sr-01 (Ends 2026-11-17)

[Vishnu Pavan Beeram <[e-mail]>]

Hi all,

As a co-author, I support adoption.

The document builds on RFC 8577 and is a useful addition to the SR-MPLS
toolkit, enabling distributed bandwidth management. I believe it is
sufficiently baked for adoption. The open items on TI-LFA protection
(Section 6.3) and facility backup protection (Section 6.2) will be
elaborated in a subsequent version, and I don't believe they should hold up
adoption. Working them through with the WG is a natural next step after
adoption.

Best regards,
Pavan

On Tue, Nov 3, 2026 at 10:08 AM Acee Lindem <[e-mail]> wrote:

> I support adoption.
>
> Thanks,
> Acee
>
> On Nov 3, 2026, at 1:04 PM, Tarek Saad <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Also adding TEAS WG for relevance to RSVP-TE protocol.
>
> Regards,
>
> *From: *Tarek Saad <[e-mail]>
> *Date: *Tuesday, November 3, 2026 at 10:03 AM
> *To: *[e-mail] <[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <
> [e-mail]>; [e-mail] <
> [e-mail]>; spring <[e-mail]>
> *Cc: *spring Chairs <[e-mail]>
> *Subject: *Re: Call for adoption: draft-beeram-mpls-rsvp-sr-01 (Ends
> 2026-11-17)
>
> Adding the SPRING WG to this thread due to the document's relevance to
> Segment Routing.
>
> Regards,
> Tarek (as MPLS WG chair)
>
> *From: *Tarek Saad via Datatracker <[e-mail]>
> *Date: *Sunday, November 1, 2026 at 8:35 PM
> *To: *[e-mail] <[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <
> [e-mail]>; [e-mail] <
> [e-mail]>
> *Subject: *Call for adoption: draft-beeram-mpls-rsvp-sr-01 (Ends
> 2026-11-17)
>
> This message starts a mpls WG Call for Adoption of:
> draft-beeram-mpls-rsvp-sr-01
>
> This Working Group Call for Adoption ends on 2026-11-17
>
> Abstract:
>    RFC 8577 introduced the concept of signaling RSVP-TE tunnels on a
>    shared MPLS forwarding plane using preinstalled "TE link labels".
>    Those labels are functionally equivalent to Segment Routing (SR)
>    Adjacency Segment Identifiers (Adj-SIDs) but are allocated and
>    distributed solely via RSVP-TE signaling.
>
>    This document extends RFC 8577 so that RSVP-TE tunnels can use
>    Segment Routing over MPLS (SR-MPLS) Adj-SIDs, as specified in RFC
>    8402 and RFC 8660, in place of TE link labels.  It restricts scope to
>    Adj-SIDs attached to a single unidirectional adjacency and defines
>    the signaling procedures and protocol extensions required to couple
>    the RSVP-TE control plane with the SR-MPLS data plane.
>
> Please reply to this message and indicate whether or not you support
> adoption
> of this Internet-Draft by the mpls WG. Comments to explain your preference
> are greatly appreciated. Please reply to all recipients of this message and
> include this message in your response.
>
> Authors, and WG participants in general, are reminded of the Intellectual
> Property Rights (IPR) disclosure obligations described in BCP 79 [2].
> Appropriate IPR disclosures required for full conformance with the
> provisions
> of BCP 78 [1] and BCP 79 [2] must be filed, if you are aware of any.
> Sanctions available for application to violators of IETF IPR Policy can be
> found at [3].
>
> Thank you.
> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp78/
> [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp79/
> [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6701/
>
> The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-beeram-mpls-rsvp-sr/
>
> There is also an HTMLized version available at:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-beeram-mpls-rsvp-sr-01
>
> A diff from the previous version is available at:
> https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-beeram-mpls-rsvp-sr-01
> _______________________________________________
> spring mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>
>
>