Hi All I have made another pass to integrate Alvaro's editorial changes. Please review and approve.
https://github.com/lisp-wg/wg-charter/pull/12/files Thanks Padma On Sat, Oct 21, 2023 at 1:06 AM Padma Pillay-Esnault <[email protected]> wrote: > Approved and Merged. > > Padma > > On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 8:15 AM Alberto Rodriguez-Natal (natal) < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Sounds good, updated. >> >> >> >> Alberto >> >> >> >> *From: *Dino Farinacci <[email protected]> >> *Date: *Friday, October 20, 2023 at 4:02 PM >> *To: *Alberto Rodriguez-Natal (natal) <[email protected]> >> *Cc: *Padma Pillay-Esnault <[email protected]>, Luigi Iannone < >> [email protected]>, LISP mailing list list <[email protected]>, >> [email protected] <[email protected]> >> *Subject: *Re: [lisp] WG work items list [WAS: Re: Proposed WG Charter >> on GitHub] >> >> I would phrase it “LISP xTRs” rather than “tunnel routers”. >> >> >> >> Dino >> >> >> >> On Oct 20, 2023, at 2:26 AM, Alberto Rodriguez-Natal (natal) < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> Hi Padma, >> >> >> >> Fixes seem fine to me, thanks! >> >> >> >> Maybe another suggestion, how about this text for mobility? >> >> “Mobility: Some LISP deployment scenarios include endpoints that move >> across different tunnel routers and/or tunnel routers that are themselves >> mobile, hence, support needs to be provided in order to achieve seamless >> connectivity.” >> >> >> >> https://github.com/lisp-wg/wg-charter/pull/11/ >> >> >> >> Thanks! >> >> Alberto >> >> *From: *Padma Pillay-Esnault <[email protected]> >> *Date: *Friday, October 20, 2023 at 7:53 AM >> *To: *Alberto Rodriguez-Natal (natal) <[email protected]> >> *Cc: *Luigi Iannone <[email protected]>, Dino Farinacci <[email protected]>, >> LISP mailing list list <[email protected]>, [email protected] < >> [email protected]> >> *Subject: *Re: [lisp] WG work items list [WAS: Re: Proposed WG Charter >> on GitHub] >> >> Hi everyone, >> >> >> >> I fixed some nits and addressed my previous editorial comments on "Moving >> to Standards Track:" and "Yang Model:". >> >> It can be found here https://github.com/lisp-wg/wg-charter/pull/10/files. >> >> >> >> Let me know if you have any further comments. >> >> >> >> Thanks >> >> Padma >> >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 11:38 PM Padma Pillay-Esnault < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >> Approved and merged. >> >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 10:05 AM Alberto Rodriguez-Natal (natal) < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> >> >> I just sent a PullRequest in GitHub with some edits. You can find it >> here: https://github.com/lisp-wg/wg-charter/pull/9 >> >> >> >> To keep the discussion on the list, here are the main points: >> >> - I switched the Name Encoding and Yang deliverable dates. I have action >> items on both (shepherd for the first and author for the second), and I >> feel Yang might require some time to get it done, while Name Encoding is >> almost there. I don’t think flipping these two dates has major implications. >> >> >> >> - I removed this sentence from the Yang item: “These management methods >> should be considered for both the data-plane, control plane, and mapping >> system components.” I think it is probably redundant and it might >> confuse more than clarify (isn’t mapping system a subset of control plane?) >> >> >> >> - I polished the language on the milestones to be consistent across the >> different items (using the same sentence structure, etc). I also use >> “document(s)” for the document bundles and those items further in the >> future, so we are flexible in how to address them. >> >> >> >> Other than that, it’s just minor edits. Let me know if you have any >> comment. >> >> >> >> Thanks! >> >> Alberto >> >> >> >> >> >> *From: *Luigi Iannone <[email protected]> >> *Date: *Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 2:01 PM >> *To: *Padma Pillay-Esnault <[email protected]> >> *Cc: *Dino Farinacci <[email protected]>, LISP mailing list list < >> [email protected]>, [email protected] <[email protected]> >> *Subject: *Re: [lisp] WG work items list [WAS: Re: Proposed WG Charter >> on GitHub] >> >> Hi Dino, Padma, >> >> >> >> The list of milestones I proposed does not have more than 2 item per >> deadline, which is reasonable to me. >> >> However, some milestones do indeed refer to several documents like >> Privacy and Security, Multicast, and mobility. >> >> IMO there is no need to list the detailed documents and if we finish >> before the schedule this is a plus not a problem. >> >> >> >> Since Nov 2023 is in 2 weeks I agree with Padma that there is no need to >> rush. >> >> >> >> The name encoding document was indeed missing, since it is a simple >> document we can publish it by March 2024. >> >> >> >> The update list looks like: >> >> >> >> 1. November 2023: Submit a LISP Yang model document to the IESG for >> consideration >> >> 2. March 2024: Submit LISP Traffic Engineering document to the IESG for >> consideration >> >> 3. March 2024: Submit LISP Reliable Transport document to the IESG for >> consideration >> >> 4. March 2024: Submit LISP Name Encoding document to the IESG for >> consideration >> >> 5. June 2024 : Submit LISP geo-coordinates to the IESG for consideration >> >> 6. June 2024: Submit a LISP NAT Traversal document to the IESG for >> consideration >> >> 7. November 2024: Submit 8111bis to the IESG for consideration >> >> 8. November 2024: Submit merged LCAFbis document to the IESG for >> consideration >> >> 9. March 2025: Submit LISP Privacy and Security documents to the IESG for >> consideration >> >> 10. March 2025: Submit 6832bis Proxy XTRs document to the IESG for >> consideration >> >> 11. June 2025: Submit LISP Mobile documents to the IESG for consideration >> >> 12. November 2025: Submit Multicast documents to the IESG for >> consideration >> >> 13. March 2026: Submit LISP Applicability document to the IESG for >> consideration >> >> 14. November 2026: Wrap-Up or recharter >> >> >> >> >> >> Better? >> >> >> >> L. >> >> >> >> >> >> On Oct 17, 2023, at 01:46, Padma Pillay-Esnault <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> Hi Dino >> >> >> >> The groupings look good! >> >> >> >> Some dates look too aggressive Nov 2023: draft-ietf-lisp-geo, >> draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding, RFC 8060 and 9306 (Standards Track). We are >> already there ... >> >> As the dates proposed are target dates, i suggest we keep the date of >> June 2024 but if we can go faster it is all good. thoughts? >> >> >> >> Similar comment for mobility. >> >> >> >> Thanks >> >> Padma >> >> >> >> On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 4:35 PM Dino Farinacci <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > What do you think of putting some major milestones for mobility and >> security sections rather than per document? >> >> I think security is further out compared to mobility. Just because other >> groups will have to peer-review the security documents. But good suggestion >> and will incldue below the set that go together (IMO). >> >> So here is what I suggest: >> >> For June 2024: Mobility documents as a set to IESG, which include: >> >> draft-ietf-lisp-eid-mobility, draft-ietf-lisp-mn, >> draft-ietf-lisp-predictive-rlocs, draft-ietf-lisp-vpn >> >> And for June 2025: Security documents as a set to IESG, which include: >> >> draft-ietf-lisp-crypto (RFC8061 to Standards Track), >> draft-ietf-lisp-ecdsa-auth, draft-ietf-lisp-eid-anonymity >> >> And then, not related to what you asked for, to put all LCAF related >> stuff in one set: >> >> For Nov 2023: >> >> draft-ietf-lisp-geo, draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding, RFC 8060 and 9306 >> (Standards Track) >> >> What do you think? >> >> Dino >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
_______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
