FYI, we have started a w.g. last call for draft-ietf-6man-sidlist-clarification-00 in the 6MAN working group.
As it says below: Please review and indicate your support or objection to proceed with the publication of this document by replying to this email keeping [email protected] in the cc: . Objections should be explained and suggestions to resolve them are highly appreciated. Bob & Jen > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Bob Hinden via Datatracker <[email protected]> > Subject: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-6man-sidlist-clarification-00 (Ends > 2026-02-22) > Date: February 8, 2026 at 4:07:43 PM PST > To: <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected], [email protected] > Resent-From: <[email protected]> > Resent-To: [email protected], [email protected] > Reply-To: Bob Hinden <[email protected]> > > This message starts a WG Last Call for: > draft-ietf-6man-sidlist-clarification-00 > > This Working Group Last Call ends on 2026-02-22 > > Abstract: > Segment Routing over IPv6 (SRv6) is the instantiation of Segment > Routing (SR) on the IPv6 data plane. Segments are indicated by > Segment Identifiers (SIDs). SRv6 utilizes the Segment Routing Header > (SRH), an IPv6 extension header, that includes a SID list indicating > the sequence of segments and any additional processing to be > performed. > > This document updates RFC 8754 by clarifying the processing of SID > list entries. It does not change any elements of the SRv6 > architecture. > > The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-6man-sidlist-clarification/ > > There is an HTML version available at: > https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-6man-sidlist-clarification-00.html > > Please review and indicate your support or objection to proceed with the > publication of this document by replying to this email keeping [email protected] > in the cc: . Objections should be explained and suggestions to resolve them > are > highly appreciated. > > Authors, and WG participants in general, are reminded of the Intellectual > Property Rights (IPR) disclosure obligations described in BCP 79 [1]. > Appropriate IPR disclosures required for full conformance with the provisions > of BCP 78 [1] and BCP 79 [2] must be filed, if you are aware of any. > Sanctions available for application to violators of IETF IPR Policy can be > found at [3]. > > Thank you. > > Bob & Jen > 6man chairs > > [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp78/ > [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp79/ > [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6701/
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
