Alvaro

Minor correction, there is also 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wkumari-intarea-safe-limited-domains/ 
for a more generic approach on limited domains

-éric

From: spring <spring-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of Alvaro Retana 
<aretana.i...@gmail.com>
Date: Thursday, 28 March 2024 at 13:03
To: SPRING WG List <spring@ietf.org>
Cc: spring-cha...@ietf.org <spring-cha...@ietf.org>
Subject: [spring] Separating Threads (draft-ietf-spring-srv6-srh-compression)
Dear WG:

While the chairs strongly appreciate the engagement in the discussions
around the SRv6 compression draft, several topics have gotten tangled,
and the subject lines do not help track the conversation. Following
this note will be two messages intended to serve as an anchor for
separate aspects of the discussion related to this document.  If we
get the descriptions wrong, please correct us.  If there are other
concerns (quite likely, given the engagement), please start separate
threads.

One discussion aspect has been whether SRv6 should have a distinct
Ethertype. The intarea WG has discussed an existing proposal [1]. To
avoid fragmentation, please move the discussion on this topic to the
intarea mailing list. Copying spring and 6man is appropriate. We note
that various descriptions on email have been unclear as to what is
required of whom ([1] has a specific proposal). Please be clear about
what is proposed/requested.

Thanks!

Alvaro
-- for spring-chairs


[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-raviolli-intarea-trusted-domain-srv6/

_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to