Re: [Lsr] [spring] Shepherd's Review of "Applicability of IS-IS Multi-Topology (MT) for Segment Routing based Network Resource Partition (NRP)" - draft-ietf-lsr-isis-sr-vtn-mt-06

Hi, I have looked up the resource-aware segments draft, and commented on its intended status. My guess (FWIW) that if it is changed from “Standards Track” to “Informational”, the chances of its not being progressed – and the associated risks for this draft – would be minimal. Regards, Sasha

Re: [Lsr] Yangdoctors last call review of draft-ietf-isis-sr-yang-19

Hi Yingzhen, Please see inline. On Thursday, January 18, 2024, 04:49:28 PM EST, Yingzhen Qu wrote: HI Reshad, Thanks for the review. I've uploaded version -20 to address your comments. Details below inline. Thanks,Yingzhen On Sat, Jan 13, 2024 at 4:24 PM Reshad Rahman via Datatracker

Re: [Lsr] [Teas] Fwd: Working Group Last Call for "Applicability of IS-IS Multi-Topology (MT) for Segment Routing based Network Resource Partition (NRP)" - draft-ietf-lsr-isis-sr-vtn-mt-06

One more attempt… The question being asked in this thread is “Should draft-ietf-lsr-isis-sr-vtn-mt proceed to WG Last Call?”. It has been noted that the relevance – indeed even the need for the draft - depends upon several documents which are in various stages of discussion including: