Xiaohu, Please see inline.
On May 30, 2016, at 6:09 AM, Xuxiaohu <xuxia...@huawei.com<mailto:xuxia...@huawei.com>> wrote: Carlos From: Int-area [mailto:int-area-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Carlos Pignataro (cpignata) Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2016 10:34 PM To: Wassim Haddad Cc: int-area@ietf.org<mailto:int-area@ietf.org> Subject: Re: [Int-area] Call for adoption of draft-xu-intarea-ip-in-udp-03 Wasim, Juan Carlos, Back to your original request, I do not support adoption of draft-xu-intarea-ip-in-udp. I also did not support draft-xu-softwire-ip-in-udp. I do not believe there’s a case for this new tunnel type. I also believe that a deeper look at the potential problem space can yield better solutions, as opposed to a solution looking for a problem. The problem associated with the LB approach as proposed in [RFC5640<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5640>] is obvious. Obviousness implies some qualitative form of value judgement. As a technical term, it falls largely short. If you feel it is obvious, and you feel t’s important, make it so, because it is not. You mention RFC 5640. We seem to have managed since 2009 (publishing date) without a new tunnel type. But more importantly, RFC 5640 concerns itself with a different problem space: augmenting BGP signaling, not defining a new tunnel type and UDP port. Thanks, — Carlos. In other words, there is no need for looking for at all. With regard to whether or not the IP-in-UDP encapsulation is the best solution to that problem, it is another thing. Xiaohu Thanks, — Carlos Pignataro. On May 19, 2016, at 1:03 PM, Wassim Haddad <wassim.had...@ericsson.com<mailto:wassim.had...@ericsson.com>> wrote: Dear all, The authors of draft-xu-intarea-ip-in-udp-03 (“Encapsulating IP in UDP”) have requested that the working group adopt this work as a WG work item. So far, WG chairs have not seen widespread support and considering that lack of opposition does not qualify as support, we’re starting a working group adoption call until June 3rd. If you consider that the draft should be adopted as a WG work item, please indicate the reason. Regards, Wassim & Juan Carlos _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list Int-area@ietf.org<mailto:Int-area@ietf.org> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
_______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list Int-area@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
