Hi Tom,
Thank you for sharing your views. I agree with your generic point about
dependency. This question is very legitimate when requesting
publication, especially if there are concerns about the maturity of some
references (note however there's no universal rule to address that kind
of situation).
After a quick scan, here's the situation we're facing for the considered
I-D:
- SRv6 YANG expired this summer (with a typo in its expiration date) and
is referenced for 2 attributes;
- SR Policy YANG expired 1 year ago and is referenced for one attribute.
Please keep in mind that we aren't running a WG LC, just an adoption
poll. In other word, I don't see your point on references as a blocking
issue that would really prevent the WG from adopting this topic as a
work item and using this I-D as a document base.
Cheers,
Julien
On 08/09/2022 10:14, tom petch wrote:
Thinking some more ...
________________________________________
From: Pce <pce-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of tom petch <ie...@btconnect.com>
Sent: 07 September 2022 12:32
Hi WG,
This email begins the WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-srv6-yang-07.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-pce-pcep-srv6-yang/
Should this draft be adopted by the PCE WG? Please state your reasons - Why /
Why not? What needs to be fixed before or after adoption? Are you willing to
work on this draft? Review comments should be posted to the list.
<tp2>
Oppose.
It is those expired references. We have I-D that have been sitting in the RFC
Editor queue waiting for their references to catch up for 1108 days - yes,
three years - and in one case, the referenced I-D has changed so that the first
document is no longer valid and will have to be taken back into the WG to be
revised, if anyone is still around who is familiar with it and willing to work
on it.
With hindsight, such I-D should have been held and not forwarded to the IESG,
or not adopted in the first place.
Here, I am not familiar with the state of the spring WG and do not know if and
when those expired I-D will progress. A last revision of April 2021 with an
I-D that has plenty that needs fixing does not look promising.
Tom Petch
<tp>
The challenge I see is the SR references, one is RFC9256, the others,
spring-sr-policy-yang and spring-srv6-yang, are expired; not a good starting
point..
The 'when' clauses use absolute form of the path which means that the when is
satisfied if there is anything meeting this anywhere in the tree, not just in
this path of the tree; if the latter is wanted, then the relative form is
required
MSD type could do with a better reference - pce-segment-routing-ipv6 points to
RFC8491 but that only sets up an IANA registry which contains many more entries
so I think the reference has to be to the IANA registry.
'Add NAI' looks like an unresolved issue
Tom Petch
Please respond by Monday 19th Sept 2022.
Please be more vocal during WG polls!
Thanks!
Dhruv & Julien
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou
falsifie. Merci.
This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged
information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete
this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been
modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
