On 28-May-20 09:50, Robert Raszuk wrote:
> Andrew,
>
> I don't think this is about killing innovation. After all no one is saying
> you can not use it in your network.
>
> WG acceptance calls
Adoption is not acceptance. At least half the messages on this topic are
written as if we were in the middle of a WG Last Call.
> are evaluated in terms of WG rough consensu if significant number of members
> of WG find a proposal useful and if they are willing to work on it.
Indeed. Exactly. Not in the least about consensus that the proposal is ready
for approval. Just that it is ready for discussion and, as you say, that there
are people willing to work on it.
> It seems clear that other then one vendor and very few individuals majority
> of the WG members do not support the adoption.
That's for the WG Chairs to evaluate, and I expect them to evaluate singing in
chorus appropriately. Also, and this is not a grammatical quibble, we don't
have "members". We have participants, and we don't count votes.
> I am not against CRH. But what I am against is that CRH/SRm6 authors already
> bounced back via SPRING doors so they have chosen to try to enter via 6man
> window. That is not proper style for any proposal.
I agree that CRH is not in scope of the SPRING charter as it stands today ("the
home of Segment Routing (SR) using MPLS (SR-MPLS) and IPv6 (SRv6)"). But let me
say again that we should hear the opinion of the routing ADs.
Regards
Brian
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
