Authors, sorry about the delay, and thanks for the thorough follow up. The ball is now rolling.
Best, Jc From: David 'equinox' Lamparter <equi...@diac24.net> Date: Monday, May 12, 2025 at 15:10 To: intarea-chairs <intarea-cha...@ietf.org> Cc: Warren Kumari <war...@kumari.net>, Internet Area <int-area@ietf.org>, draft-chroboczek-intarea-v4-via...@ietf.org <draft-chroboczek-intarea-v4-via...@ietf.org> Subject: Re: [Int-area] Re: Requesting adoption: draft-chroboczek-intarea-v4-via-v6 - "IPv4 routes with an IPv6 next hop" > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-chroboczek-intarea-v4-via-v6/> Just to add another body to the pile-up here, I'd also appreciate this moving forward. Is there anything to help with? -David On Wed, May 07, 2025 at 07:34:30AM -0700, Warren Kumari wrote: > Dear IntArea Chairs, > > A reminder that the authors of draft-chroboczek-intarea-v4-via-v6 - "IPv4 > routes with an IPv6 next hop" > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-chroboczek-intarea-v4-via-v6/> have > requested adoption of this document by the IntArea WG. > > W > > > On Wed, Apr 09, 2025 at 11:00 AM, Warren Kumari <war...@kumari.net> wrote: > > > Dear IntArea Chairs, > > > > The authors of draft-chroboczek-intarea-v4-via-v6 - "IPv4 routes with an > > IPv6 next hop" > > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-chroboczek-intarea-v4-via-v6/> would > > like to request adoption of this document by the IntArea WG. > > > > It's been a few weeks since the meeting, so here are some helpful > > resources (I'd managed to swap out all state, so I assume you have too :-)): > > Draft: draft-chroboczek-intarea-v4-via-v6 - "IPv4 routes with an IPv6 > > next hop" > > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-chroboczek-intarea-v4-via-v6/> > > Slides: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/122/materials/ > > slides-122-intarea-ipv4-routes-with-an-ipv6-next-hop-00.pdf > > Video recording (linked to discussion): https://youtu.be/ > > NkbWXK1I-74?t=2926 > > > > Very hight level summaries of comments (apologies in advance if I > > misunderstood your point, or over summarized!): > > > > David Lamparter: Concern — this should also work on hosts; the host is > > just the first router. Please include a note that they are also covered. > > > > Tobias Fiebig: 8950 — Please please go ahead with this. It works on hosts. > > I’ve setup an AS with only V6 other than on the hosts. > > > > David Schinazi: This is great, I support it and am happy to review. > > > > Maria Matejka: There are some people requesting translations Would like > > more guidance on not routing differently between v4 and v6. [ Note: The > > audio was not great, and I may have missed a bunch of detail. Apologies.] > > > > Name inaudible: It is unclear if SAVNET will allow the borrowed address to > > be used. Please make sure that SAVNET WG is aware. > > > > Krishnaswamy Ananthamurthy: Cisco Nrxus OS has implemented this for more > > than 8 years. Are you also planning on covering recursive next hops? Your > > example does, but please add details in the draft. > > > > Éric Vyncke: This is V4 via V6, but please note that it also works for V6 > > via V4. > > With AD hat:I don't think that Standards Track is the right track for this > > document. > > W: Yeah, this should probably be Informational, or *possibly* BCP. > > Chairs: If you agree that this should be adopted, please let us know which > > :-) > > > > Thanks for you time, > > Warren Kumari
_______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list -- int-area@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to int-area-le...@ietf.org
