Hi All, Please note that we just submitted a new revision (-05) of the draft to address the comments received. As discussed during the adoption call, we added a new section on Implementation Recommendations and we also proposed a NextHeader field to support extended data fields.
Comments are always welcome. Regards, Giuseppe (on behalf of the coauthors) -----Original Message----- From: spring <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Giuseppe Fioccola Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2023 11:55 AM To: Joel Halpern <[email protected]>; SPRING WG List <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [spring] Regarding adoption call for https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-fz-spring-srv6-alt-mark Hi Joel, Thanks for the update. We intend to work on a new version of the draft soon. Regards, Giuseppe (on behalf of the coauthors) -----Original Message----- From: spring <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Joel Halpern Sent: Monday, February 20, 2023 11:41 PM To: SPRING WG List <[email protected]> Subject: [spring] Regarding adoption call for https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-fz-spring-srv6-alt-mark The WG Adoption call time has expired. There was good support for the document. There were also concerns expressed about whether there is a need for the work and how it relates to existing RFCs. The authors have agreed to write a deployment / operations section that better explains why one would do this. As such, we will declare the adoption call suspended pending the update, and then to give the WG participants one week to respond as to whether the new text addresses their concerns. Yours, Joel, as WG Chair managing this call _______________________________________________ spring mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring _______________________________________________ spring mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring _______________________________________________ spring mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
