IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Tvr] Re: [EXT] Re: Consensus check: Remove "Implementation and Operational Considerations" milestone

"Sipos, Brian J." <Brian.Sipos@jhuapl.edu> Wed, 12 August 2026 14:18 UTC

Return-Path: <Brian.Sipos@jhuapl.edu>
X-Original-To: tvr@mail2.ietf.org
Delivered-To: tvr@mail2.ietf.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5742A12893D86 for <tvr@mail2.ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Aug 2026 07:18:43 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1786544323; bh=soW3nPT2rv9xLdWGBfrnE8GM6NdCDn17i9WhUrFtwQs=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To; b=Hy9sb9QRNEL2pL3nESnKW3Py0a6mRhlXke0gp3XMqXy3nSHh6jnk4wqLZTHo4apj5 WsUIkkIAqLaX7b4lk07SAmFdKT1rixn8frmRN+l139i/zuswag3QulXEzuQ7NpKgc6 Nt0oUF6alIV5XyDBghbNRBbOzNCQVok0/HlnOirs=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.096
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.096 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: mail2.ietf.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=jhuapl.edu
Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SFEYV-LqkKv9 for <tvr@mail2.ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Aug 2026 07:18:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aplegw04.jhuapl.edu (aplegw04.jhuapl.edu [128.244.208.132]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 727EB12893D79 for <tvr@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Aug 2026 07:18:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (aplegw04.jhuapl.edu [127.0.0.1]) by aplegw04.jhuapl.edu (8.18.1.11/8.18.1.11) with ESMTP id 67CDtn2H716334; Wed, 12 Aug 2026 10:18:32 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=jhuapl.edu; h=cc :content-type:date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:subject:to; s=JHUAPL2024; bh=Bw1aGJ5L/BX7JLRXaEGj3ha R6oGb4ZjqJFVoL/7kj/A=; b=gM6Kkk4qixX5oLm2Yg4fQG8ac63NezfDmN1MRgL otlzLaiXHUU5VaNYHJxogA+8XlZkoEu84mc7EV0gpEP3RLtUfnyIEi0t5NpFG/AJ fiGZvMt3Es5CIboqOcKE0hZlnreQxwCVb+B5JK8wyqMqmeMQjPAdG5jZ09SZyXNi xSEdgJUTRFWPEq5uD2IdQspkUpzoRZ9cGMeipig53DcYP1oTz+0ECfHwV6pHRlgM DU9mLm43P/aLcXV5ifyszqceHYaseFENAo9KabEZg2BmamX7c9hOwPNiVS4TIy5I saohDgbK+Y23mVOZviA+XNXyxmGw1dAKnsoVM0M+cJFUkCA==
Received: from aplex30.dom1.jhuapl.edu (aplex30.dom1.jhuapl.edu [10.114.162.2]) by aplegw04.jhuapl.edu (PPS) with ESMTPS id 4fxn2jjsyq-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 12 Aug 2026 10:18:32 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from aplex39.dom1.jhuapl.edu (10.114.162.26) by aplex30.dom1.jhuapl.edu (10.114.162.2) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.2562.45; Wed, 12 Aug 2026 10:18:31 -0400
Received: from aplex39.dom1.jhuapl.edu ([fe80::45d4:6ccc:c2ee:2a03]) by aplex39.dom1.jhuapl.edu ([fe80::45d4:6ccc:c2ee:2a03%9]) with mapi id 15.02.2562.045; Wed, 12 Aug 2026 10:18:31 -0400
From: "Sipos, Brian J." <Brian.Sipos@jhuapl.edu>
To: 'Tony Li' <tony.li@tony.li>
Thread-Topic: [EXT] [Tvr] Re: Consensus check: Remove "Implementation and Operational Considerations" milestone
Thread-Index: AQHdKhXT43IuKnjfwk2FbRQExznlebaaM5YAgAAC5ICAAD3R8A==
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 14:18:31 +0000
Message-ID: <6f5aff976fb245ef929f4a8222c8e5ba@jhuapl.edu>
References: <EBFCF4EB-7BB8-4D41-8F1D-A3E92FAEC42A@tony.li> <CADnDZ88FTPy6EbBRjefX12JUMuUhdvONH+xAv6JrPc4L3eEXXA@mail.gmail.com> <BA78A554-F8D8-40C4-AB84-9BE5B17F95EF@tony.li> <001601dd2a23$ccdd73b0$66985b10$@olddog.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <001601dd2a23$ccdd73b0$66985b10$@olddog.co.uk>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.114.162.18]
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; micalg="SHA1"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0099_01DD2A43.EC207B30"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CrossPremisesHeadersFilteredBySendConnector: aplex30.dom1.jhuapl.edu
X-OrganizationHeadersPreserved: aplex30.dom1.jhuapl.edu
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1176,Hydra:6.1.134,FMLib:17.12.100.49 definitions=2026-08-12_04,2026-08-12_01,2025-10-01_01
Message-ID-Hash: YK2OEPSHLARGNZLRQB5Y7O4PLBQZ2DXQ
X-Message-ID-Hash: YK2OEPSHLARGNZLRQB5Y7O4PLBQZ2DXQ
X-MailFrom: Brian.Sipos@jhuapl.edu
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: "tvr@ietf.org" <tvr@ietf.org>, "adrian@olddog.co.uk" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [Tvr] Re: [EXT] Re: Consensus check: Remove "Implementation and Operational Considerations" milestone
List-Id: Time-Variant Routing <tvr.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tvr/EFOOi4sjJXeL9YK64E_e77WfRDU>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tvr>
List-Help: <mailto:tvr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:tvr-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:tvr@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:tvr-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:tvr-leave@ietf.org>

Chairs,

In addition to what Adrian has mentioned, the TVR Requirements document (now in editor’s queue) added an Operational Considerations section after IESG feedback. It explicitly does not cover any specific systems, it is more abstract, but does address topics of operational concern for TVR deployments.

 

Brian S.

 

From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk> 
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2026 2:29 AM
To: 'Tony Li' <tony.li@tony.li>
Cc: tvr@ietf.org
Subject: [EXT] [Tvr] Re: Consensus check: Remove "Implementation and Operational Considerations" milestone

 


APL external email warning: Verify sender forwardingalgorithm@ietf.org <mailto:forwardingalgorithm@ietf.org>  before clicking links or attachments

 

Hi Tony, WG,

 

I’m more of a casual observer of TVR than a WG participant, so my opinion should not count for much (if anything at all).

 

I don’t think the milestone is your problem – milestones are just aids for the chairs to manage the WG.

More of an issue is that the charter says…

 

| Specifically, the TVR WG will work on these items:

|

| :

|

| (6) Implementation and Operational Considerations

| This document should provide advice and guidance to implementors and operators.

 

I think your get-out-of-jail-free card in this instance is Section 6 of draft-ietf-tvr-applicability which provides a good chunk of text on the subject. And, of course, the YANG model, itself in draft-ietf-tvr-schedule-yang. 

 

So you can make a reasonable argument that you have addressed the charter work-topic, but that it was done in a different set of documents from what was originally planned.

 

Worth checking with the AD that they are happy that you have this covered, but otherwise, I have no objection seeing that the actual work of Operational Considerations has been addressed.

 

Cheers,

Adrian

 

On Sun, Aug 9, 2026 at 5:57 PM Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li <mailto:tony.li@tony.li> > wrote:


[WG chair hat: on]


Hi all,

We currently have a milestone to produce a document on "Implementation and Operational Considerations”.  So far, no one has stepped forward to produce this and it’s not clear that it’s needed.  We would like to propose that we drop this milestone.

Opinions? Comments?

This is a WG consensus check.  It closes in two weeks: 9am PDT, Aug. 23rd 2026.

Thanks,
Ed & Tony

-- 
Tvr mailing list -- tvr@ietf.org <mailto:tvr@ietf.org> 
To unsubscribe send an email to tvr-leave@ietf.org <mailto:tvr-leave@ietf.org>

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status