Re: [spring] [mpls] The MPLS WG has placed draft-farrel-mpls-sfc in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued"

Hi John, Sorry for the late reply, was on PTO. Please see my comments below. Best Regards, Daniel On 2018-03-09, 2:14 PM, "John E Drake" wrote: Daniel, There work group adoption process started several months ago. We asked Loa to initiate the process and

Re: [spring] [mpls] The MPLS WG has placed draft-farrel-mpls-sfc in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued"

Daniel, There work group adoption process started several months ago. We asked Loa to initiate the process and he asked four members of the MPLS review team to review the draft, which they subsequently did, with all four indicating that they thought the draft should be adopted. Then and only

Re: [spring] [mpls] The MPLS WG has placed draft-farrel-mpls-sfc in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued"

I, too, hope we can move to a technical discussion of the differences between the proposals and not spend time thrashing around in IETF politics. I'm sure the ADs will help us understand what is written in the various WG charters, so our best next step would be to read (you know, like all the

Re: [spring] [mpls] The MPLS WG has placed draft-farrel-mpls-sfc in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued"

I second the concerns raised by Xiaohu, Francois, and Zafar. From: mpls on behalf of "Zafar Ali (zali)" Date: Thursday, March 8, 2018 at 7:02 PM To: "Francois Clad (fclad)" , "徐小虎(义先)" Cc: mpls

Re: [spring] [mpls] The MPLS WG has placed draft-farrel-mpls-sfc in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued"

Dear MPLS WG Chairs and the authors of draft-farrel-mpls-sfc, I would like to draw your attention to the serious issue raised by Xiaohu and Francois. Summary: Please note that this working group adaption against the IETF process and its spirit. Please recall the adaption call. Details: Just

Re: [spring] [mpls] The MPLS WG has placed draft-farrel-mpls-sfc in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued"

Francois, Xiaohu, I fully agree with you. s. > On Mar 8, 2018, at 11:20 AM, Francois Clad (fclad) wrote: > > Hi Xiaohu, all, > > I agree with the point raised by Xiaohu. The draft-farrel-mpls-sfc is copying > ideas described in draft-xu-mpls-service-chaining. Please note

Re: [spring] [mpls] The MPLS WG has placed draft-farrel-mpls-sfc in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued"

Hi Xiaohu, all, I agree with the point raised by Xiaohu. The draft-farrel-mpls-sfc is copying ideas described in draft-xu-mpls-service-chaining. Please note that the work in draft-xu-mpls-service-chaining started one year before draft-farrel-mpls-sfc. At IETF100, three drafts in this area were