Speaking as co-chair.
I also believe that the WG should focus on producing meaningful material
we can submit to IESG with confidence.
In fact we have discussed with the authors of
draft-ietf-spring-sr-oam-requirement and out of the replies I have
received, consensus was not to push this document to IESG.
-m
Le 17/05/2017 à 17:18, Carlos Pignataro (cpignata) a écrit :
Hi,
I do not believe SPRING should work
on draft-ietf-spring-sr-oam-requirement. It makes more sense to focus on
solutions than these weak and sparse requirements for very diverse set
of potential protocols (LSP Ping, BFD, S-BFD, SRv6 OAMs, etc).
Thanks,
— Carlos.
On May 16, 2017, at 4:18 AM, Greg Mirsky <gregimir...@gmail.com
<mailto:gregimir...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Dear Authors,
I'd like to bring your attention to the WG document OAM Requirements
for Segment Routing Network
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-spring-sr-oam-requirement-03>.
I think that many requirements listed in your document are common
requirements for OAM in Segment Routing network listed in the above
mentioned document.
Kind regards,
Greg
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
spring@ietf.org <mailto:spring@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
spring@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
spring@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
