Hi, Yingzhen, Chris and Acee:

There maybe some misapprehension for the overall WGLC process:

I have raised the concerns on this WGLC draft on September 6 for the “Major 
Issues Unsolved” of current proposal, and wait for the authors to respond.
(Ref1: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/Q-fzVS7tHvRL3xUMdiFwBpuKWlY/)

But, there is no any response, only the author declares himself repeatedly that 
the revised draft address all raised concerns.

I raised against such declaration on September 26(Ref2: 
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/Q-fzVS7tHvRL3xUMdiFwBpuKWlY/), but 
received still no any response from the authors.

I don’t want to repeat the against for each of such declaration later, but it 
doesn’t represent my concerns are addressed.

I don’t know what’s the authors thinks, maybe they want to shun such raised 
issues? Or maybe they have no reasonable explanation for these obvious existing 
concerns?

Then, I think we shouldn’t forward this document until it can address the 
“major issues unsolved” (Ref1), or accept the proposal that limits its 
application scope to only the enumerated two TLVs, instead of the general 
solution can apply also to other MP-TLVs.

I want to EMPHASIZE that such proposal is NOT the right direction to solve the 
aimed problem.

We need the authors, or the LSR Chairs to solve such disputes, or else, we will 
need our AD to step in.

Aijun Wang
China Telecom

> On Oct 15, 2024, at 04:28, Yingzhen Qu <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> 
> Dear LSR WG,
> 
> After much good discussion and work over the last 3 months the WGLC of 
> draft-ietf-lsr-multi-tlv has now reached the point of rough consensus and so 
> the chairs are declaring the WGLC complete.
> 
> A good compromise has been reached on the remaining topic under discussion 
> with the addition of the RECOMMEND to add configuration control to 
> implementations of the feature. This balanced the desire of operators for 
> direct configuration with the vendors who have long standing deployed 
> implementations of multi-tlv which operate based on need due to indirect 
> configuration.
> 
> Thanks again for all the good work.
> 
> 
> Acee, Chris and Yingzhen (LSR Co-Chairs)
> _______________________________________________
> Lsr mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to