Re: [tsvwg] Adoption call for draft-white-tsvwg-l4sops - to conclude 24th March 2021

[Pete Heist <[e-mail]>]

I'll explain my position of not taking a stance on this document.

The available data suggest that L4S and conventional traffic cannot
coexist safely in the same RFC3168 signaling queue, and that those
queues have been deployed to some extent. I don't think this is
something that operational guidance by itself can fix, and would prefer
to see that addressed first.

However, I'm also not sure that impeding progress on this document is
helpful. In case the WG decides that there is rough consensus to
proceed with known safety issues, then I'd likely be among those
insisting on WGLC for this draft together with the L4S drafts. This
will provide published information on what to expect, and document what
issues were known by the IETF prior to approval for experiment.

If the document is adopted, then I should be able to provide at least
one review down the line.

Pete

On Tue, 2021-03-09 at 16:05 +0000, Gorry Fairhurst wrote:
> TSVWG,
> 
> The WG is running an adoption call for:
> 
>      Operational Guidance for Deployment of L4S in the Internet
>      https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-white-tsvwg-l4sops-01
> 
> will end at midnight UTC on 24th March 2021.
> 
> Please do read the draft, and send any comments/concerns to either
> the 
> tsvwg or to the chairs <[e-mail]>. Notes of support to 
> progress this work, and volunteers to review the drafts will also be 
> very welcome at this stage.
> 
> Best wishes,
> Gorry, Wes and David
> (tsvwg co-chairs)
>