I support the adoption, though we do still need to reach consensus on the long discussion on whether replication segment should be reused/extended for the replication node.
Jeffrey -----Original Message----- From: spring <spring-boun...@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Joel M. Halpern Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2021 8:08 AM To: spring@ietf.org Subject: [spring] Error / Calls regarding adoption of draft-ietf-spring-sr-redundancy-protection [External Email. Be cautious of content] Oops. The chairs declared adoption of what is now published as <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-spring-sr-redundancy-protection__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!WQ01VmPbnRCaIaSVo_T3JR6qu0mvWeZ5G46XXfpPzaBVIZeFeqa0Mx_-SS8ff6Vp$ > without a proper adoption call. We suspect that adoption is okay with the WG, but we need to make sure. Does anyone object to the adoption of this document by the WG? If there is significant objection we will determine what steps to take. Remember that wanting changes in the document does not require revoking the adoption if you feel the basic approach is what the WG wants to use as a basis for work on this topic going forward. Also, would the authors please confirm to the list that all relevant known IPR has been disclosed. Please respond if you are an author or have concerns. Thank you, Joel, Bruno, and Jim _______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!WQ01VmPbnRCaIaSVo_T3JR6qu0mvWeZ5G46XXfpPzaBVIZeFeqa0Mx_-SQJwX846$ Juniper Business Use Only _______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
