The WG adoption call has completed and there is more than sufficient support for adoption. What’s more, vendors are implementing and operators are planning of deploying the extensions. Please republish the draft as draft-ietf-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce-00.
A couple of WG members, while acknowledging the use case, thought that it would be better satisfied outside of the IGPs. In fact, they both offered other viable alternatives. However, with the overwhelming support and commitment to implementation and deployment, we are going forward with WG adoption of this document. As the Co-Chair managing the adoption, I don’t see this optional mechanism as fundamentally changing the IGPs. There was also quite vehement opposition from the authors of draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement. This draft purports to support the same use case as well as others (the archives can be consulted for the discussion). Further discussion of this other draft and the use cases it addresses should be in the context of draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement and not the WG draft. Thanks, Acee > On Aug 23, 2023, at 3:58 PM, Acee Lindem <acee.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > > LSR Working Group, > > This begins the working group adoption call for “IGP Unreachable Prefix > Announcement” - draft-ppsenak-lsr-igp-unreach-prefix-announce-04. > Please indicate your support or objection on this list prior to September > 7th, 2023. > > Thanks, > Acee _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list Lsr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
