Speaking as WG chair: There has been considerable support for this document. However, there has also been objections to the document. The objections are either that there is nothing to standardize given that all pieces exist and that the MT isn’t a viable option for VTNs since it isn’t scalable.
Since most of the draft’s support is from “friends and family”, I’d like to know of the WG members who supported it, would you really want to market it as a VTN solution? Those of you who operate networks, would you actually consider deploying it? In any case, section 5 needs to be expanded on the scalability and where using MTs to support VTNs would make sense and where it wouldn’t. Thanks, Acee From: Lsr <lsr-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee=40cisco....@dmarc.ietf.org> Date: Tuesday, March 2, 2021 at 6:28 PM To: "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org> Subject: [Lsr] WG Adoption Poll for “Using IS-IS Multi-Topology (MT) for Segment Routing based Virtual Transport Network” - draft-xie-lsr-isis-sr-vtn-mt-03 This information draft describes how MT could be used for VTN segmentation. The authors have asked for WG adoption. This begins a three week LSR Working Group Adoption Poll for “Using IS-IS Multi-Topology (MT) for Segment Routing based Virtual Transport Network” - draft-xie-lsr-isis-sr-vtn-mt-03. I’m giving it three weeks due to the IETF next week. Please register your support or objection on this list prior to the end of the adoption poll on 3/24/2020. Thanks, Acee
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list Lsr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
