On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 1:51 AM, Declan Ma <m...@zdns.cn> wrote: > Chris, > > I would like to take this thread to request for comments on how to move on > SLURM. > > During the Seoul meeting, Tim suggested moving it to SIDROPS since SIDR is > being closed. > > Yet I had the impression that the AD hopes keeping the list/structure > going until current work items are done. > > Considering the only issue facing SLURM is the file format that Tim and > Rudiger mentioned in the MIC, IMHO, if this WG won’t plan to move SLURM to > SIDROPS, WGLC is desirable to bring about inputs and comments to conclude > this work. > > if we're just haggling on format... then let's try to finish here? How about we give it until ~monday for comments here, then start WGLC if no comments/movement?
> > Di > > > > 在 2016年12月1日，02:33，Christopher Morrow <morrowc.li...@gmail.com> 写道： > > > > And again, restarting... post meeting and post travel refocusing :) > > > > On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 11:35 AM, Christopher Morrow < > morrowc.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Restarting this thread, with some updates :) > > > > Preparing for Seoul in a few weeks time, with the intent that we do not > meet face-to-face in Chicago, have all current 'protocol' related docs to > the IESG/done and meet instead in sidr-ops if there are agenda items at > that time :) > > > > Currently we have the following in IESG/pub-request status (13 > documents): > > draft-ietf-sidr-adverse-actions > > draft-ietf-sidr-as-migration > > draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-algs > > draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-ops > > draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-overview > > draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-pki-profiles > > draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol > > draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol (10/26 sent forward) > > > > draft-ietf-sidr-origin-validation-signaling > > draft-ietf-sidr-publication > > draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-oob-setup > > draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-rtr-rfc6810-bis > > > > > > I had thought I sent validation-reconsidered forward for processing, I'm > doing that today: > > draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered > > > > Currently still active documents (6 documents): > > > > draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-rollover > > draft-ietf-sidr-lta-use-cases > > draft-ietf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light > > draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-tree-validation > > draft-ietf-sidr-rtr-keying > > draft-ietf-sidr-slurm > > > > (this reflects the changes since the last email, included below) > > > > I believe we're still planning to move (and have agreement from authors): > > draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-rollover > > draft-ietf-sidr-lta-use-cases > > draft-ietf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light > > draft-ietf-sidr-rtr-keying > > > > draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-tree-validation > > > > which leaves to be dealt with by Chicago 2 documents: > > draft-ietf-sidr-slurm > > > > I think this is good, I believe (and of course I should be corrected if > wrong) > > slurm - more work inbound and discussion planned in Seoul > > tree-validation - I thought moved to sidr-ops, but don't have docs to > back that up. > > > > > > I still think this is good, I will be sending a request to the OPS-AD > folk today to move: > > draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-rollover > > draft-ietf-sidr-lta-use-cases > > draft-ietf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light > > draft-ietf-sidr-rtr-keying > > draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-tree-validation > > > > to sidr-ops... If there are corrections/additions please send them along > :) > > > > -chris > > > > -chris > > > > On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 4:56 PM, Chris Morrow <morr...@ops-netman.net> > wrote: > > > > Howdy SIDR peeps, > > (+bonus ops ad) > > > > Following on the Berlin meeting we were trying to accomplish two > > things: > > > > 1) get all documents related to sidr protocols into wglc and then > > publication > > > > 2) get all documents which are more operationally focused moved > > along to an ops group (sidr-ops or something akin to that) > > > > With that in mind there are 8 documents in the publication queue: > > draft-ietf-sidr-as-migration > > draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-algs > > draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-ops > > draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-overview > > draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-pki-profiles > > draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol > > draft-ietf-sidr-origin-validation-signaling > > draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-rtr-rfc6810-bis > > > > and 11 still in progress. Of the 11 left Sandy and I think they > > roughly break down like: > > > > Documents which should move to the ops group: > > draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-rollover > > draft-ietf-sidr-lta-use-cases > > draft-ietf-sidr-route-server-rpki-light - authors notified/queried > about this > > draft-ietf-sidr-rtr-keying > > > > documents which should finish out in sidr: > > draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol > > draft-ietf-sidr-publication > > draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-oob-setup - pub request in flight > > draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-tree-validation > > draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered > > draft-ietf-sidr-slurm - authors recently updated > > draft-ietf-sidr-adverse-actions - wglc imminent > > > > I think if there's no meaningful discussion on change for these > > between now and 9/16/2016 (Sept 16th) we will assume this list is > > correct. For documents in the 'move' list, if progress to publication > > happens 'good!'. For all documents in the 'stays' list: > > 1) we aim to have wglc by Seoul > > 2) publication requests started on as many as possible > > > > We plan to meet in Seoul, but not in Chicago (Mar 2017) where we > > expect the ops group to exist and meet. We can progress documents in > > SIDR after Seoul, but the WG should close out shortly after the new > > year. (or that's the goal). > > > > Thoughts? > > -chris > > > > _______________________________________________ > > sidr mailing list > > sidr@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > sidr mailing list > > sidr@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr > >
_______________________________________________ sidr mailing list sidr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
