<no hats>

I'm (obviously) in favor of having this clarification captured in a
document (and not just in an erratum that someone might or might not
notice).  LGTM.

On Mon, Feb 9, 2026 at 8:51 AM Bob Hinden <[email protected]> wrote:

> FYI, we have started a w.g. last call
> for draft-ietf-6man-sidlist-clarification-00 in the 6MAN working group.
>
> As it says below:
>
> Please review and indicate your support or objection to proceed with the
> publication of this document by replying to this email keeping *[email protected]
> <[email protected]>*
> in the cc: . Objections should be explained and suggestions to resolve
> them are
> highly appreciated.
>
>
> Bob & Jen
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> *From: *Bob Hinden via Datatracker <[email protected]>
> *Subject: **WG Last Call: draft-ietf-6man-sidlist-clarification-00 (Ends
> 2026-02-22)*
> *Date: *February 8, 2026 at 4:07:43 PM PST
> *To: *<[email protected]>
> *Cc: *[email protected], [email protected]
> *Resent-From: *<[email protected]>
> *Resent-To: *[email protected], [email protected]
> *Reply-To: *Bob Hinden <[email protected]>
>
> This message starts a WG Last Call for:
> draft-ietf-6man-sidlist-clarification-00
>
> This Working Group Last Call ends on 2026-02-22
>
> Abstract:
>   Segment Routing over IPv6 (SRv6) is the instantiation of Segment
>   Routing (SR) on the IPv6 data plane.  Segments are indicated by
>   Segment Identifiers (SIDs).  SRv6 utilizes the Segment Routing Header
>   (SRH), an IPv6 extension header, that includes a SID list indicating
>   the sequence of segments and any additional processing to be
>   performed.
>
>   This document updates RFC 8754 by clarifying the processing of SID
>   list entries.  It does not change any elements of the SRv6
>   architecture.
>
> The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-6man-sidlist-clarification/
>
> There is an HTML version available at:
>
> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-6man-sidlist-clarification-00.html
>
> Please review and indicate your support or objection to proceed with the
> publication of this document by replying to this email keeping
> [email protected]
> in the cc: . Objections should be explained and suggestions to resolve
> them are
> highly appreciated.
>
> Authors, and WG participants in general, are reminded of the Intellectual
> Property Rights (IPR) disclosure obligations described in BCP 79 [1].
> Appropriate IPR disclosures required for full conformance with the
> provisions
> of BCP 78 [1] and BCP 79 [2] must be filed, if you are aware of any.
> Sanctions available for application to violators of IETF IPR Policy can be
> found at [3].
>
> Thank you.
>
> Bob & Jen
> 6man chairs
>
> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp78/
> [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp79/
> [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6701/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> spring mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to