Nice response, Bruno.
Thanks.
Adrian

-----Original Message-----
From: bruno.decra...@orange.com <bruno.decra...@orange.com> 
Sent: 15 April 2019 10:47
To: adr...@olddog.co.uk
Cc: lsr@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [Lsr] Status of draft-ietf-isis-encapsulation-cap

Hi Adrian,

> On the other hand,
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ospf-encapsulation-cap/ found
> its way onto the RFC Editor Queue at around the same date and has
languished
> there ever since.

The OSPF document progressed well. The decision was made to normatively
reference the IDR document for some codepoints, mostly because the IDR
document was pre-dating.
But then IDR document did not progress that fast and hence the OSPF document
is in RFC editor queue waiting for the normative reference (for 538 days
i.e. 1,5 years and counting).

> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-isis-encapsulation-cap/ shows
expired in October 2017,

The OSPF document had been significantly updated/rewritten toward the end
which required some significant work. Since there were less traction with
the IS-IS counterpart, to be honest I did not feel motivated to do the
equivalent work for the IS-IS draft.
If there is an interest for the IS-IS draft, we can revive and update it.
OTOH, I'd rather avoid doing the work just to see the WG not progressing it
to IESG during last call

I assume (1) that your interest is coming from the IESG review on
draft-ietf-mpls-sr-over-ip. draft-ietf-mpls-sr-over-ip is built over the IGP
use case and hence relies on IGP advertising the encapsulation capability.
Hence the normative reference, hence the fear the document would stay in the
RFC editor queue for some time/ever. I think that this process question is
mostly for the IESG. Personally I feel that a pragmatic approach would be to
keep OSPF as a normative reference and downgrade IS-IS as informative. That
may seem like a strange difference of treatment but the alternative is
likely to just "silently" remove the IS-IS reference which would be an even
bigger different of treatment.

Regards,

Bruno

(1) Actually, your PS made it clear.

PS:
> Any clues?
Thanks for not asking for the solution. That makes me feel more useful, for
the same amount of work ;-)


-----Original Message-----
From: Lsr [mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel
Sent: Saturday, April 13, 2019 5:59 PM
To: lsr@ietf.org
Subject: [Lsr] Status of draft-ietf-isis-encapsulation-cap

Hi,

Any clues?

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-isis-encapsulation-cap/ shows
expired in October 2017, so I guess that is good and dead.

On the other hand,
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ospf-encapsulation-cap/ found
its way onto the RFC Editor Queue at around the same date and has languished
there ever since.

Did the ISIS work get replaced by some other draft without the "replaced by"
link being set up?
Was it deemed unnecessary in ISIS?

Thanks,
Adrian (who is trying to get draft-ietf-mpls-sr-over-ip through the IESG and
finds a reference to this draft)
--
Fairy tales from North Wales for adults of all ages
https://www.feedaread.com/profiles/8604/
Available from your favourite online bookseller.
Or contact me to receive a signed copy by mail.

_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
Lsr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr

____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu
ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou
falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged
information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and
delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been
modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.

_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
Lsr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr

Reply via email to