As co-author, I support WG adoption. I also strongly favor Experimental Track for this draft. This accurately reflects the state of this work. One of the possible final outcomes of this work may be that multiple approaches work and that there is no need for standardization. TBD Until the need for standardization is demonstrated this work should remain experimental.
Les From: Lsr <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee) Sent: Monday, November 22, 2021 6:07 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call for "IS-IS Fast Flooding" - draft-decraeneginsberg-lsr-isis-fast-flooding-00 We indicated the intent to adopt of draft-decraeneginsberg-lsr-isis-fast-flooding-00 as an LSR WG document at the IETF 112 LSR WG meeting. We are now confirming WG consensus on this action. Please indicate your support or objection on this list by 12:00 AM UTC on December 7th, 2021. Another question that came to light is whether the document should be standards track or experimental. If you have an opinion on this matter, please chime in along with your arguments for one track or the other. We probably won’t make a final decision on this now but let’s get the discussion started. Here is a link for your convenience: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-decraeneginsberg-lsr-isis-fast-flooding/ Thanks, Acee
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
