Hi Ketan, > I believe you are referring to the "BCP" (of Informational) content of these drafts.
Quite the opposite ... I am referring to the Standards Track content .. especially in respect to the IDR draft: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mishra-idr-v4-islands-v6-core-4pe/ I do not find anything new in it that would not have already been standardized. Especially I see lot's of text verbatim copied from RFC8950. As far as BESS drafts I refrain from commenting as those drafts are IMO unreadable. If you have an abstract spanning 3 pages and a quote to list over 30 references that is right there not a good sign. Thx, R. On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 1:43 PM Ketan Talaulikar <ketant.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Robert, > > I believe you are referring to the "BCP" (of Informational) content of > these drafts. If so, my impression is that the authors wanted to put this > information together for the benefit of the operator community. I'll let > them respond. > > You can see my comments during the BESS WG adoption poll for one of the > drafts here [1]. > > My concern was more the parts that need standardization need to be called > out very succinctly (in hopefully a short draft) and the rest is all simply > informational material that can be clubbed together to perhaps make more > efficient use of reviewers time. > > Thanks, > Ketan > > [1] > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/Wj-Y_m-t7C0bZ90NM-hmQbOYoPY/ > > > On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 5:59 PM Robert Raszuk <rob...@raszuk.net> wrote: > >> Hi Ketan, >> >> If you are referring to interconnecting v4 only sites draft I have number >> of comments: >> >> * The draft is not needed at all >> >> * we can seamlessly interconnect v4 sites over v6 core using v4 mapped v6 >> addresses >> >> * Zero control plane change is required/needed >> >> * number of vendors are shipping it >> >> Moreover sites even if today speaking v4 only sooner then later will talk >> also v6. We can not ship a std track document which makes v6 deployment >> harder or no-op for any site. >> >> Best, >> Robert >> >> On Fri, Nov 11, 2022, 11:19 Ketan Talaulikar <ketant.i...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Gyan, >>> >>> Sharing a couple of suggestions here for your 5 drafts (4 in BESS + 1 in >>> IDR) as we lost time due to the audio issues: >>> >>> (1) put the portions to be standardized (very focussed/small hopefully) >>> in one single draft and post/share with both IDR and BESS since you are >>> changing NH encoding (from what I heard?) >>> (2) all other informational/BCP material could be combined in a single >>> draft (perhaps the existing BESS WG draft) >>> >>> IMHO, that would facilitate an appropriate focussed review of the >>> content/proposals. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Ketan >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> BESS mailing list >>> BESS@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess >>> >>
_______________________________________________ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
