Subject: [pim] draft-venaas-pim-reserved-bits-01 Adoption Call

From: Michael McBride <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2018 22:00:22 +0000

Hello pimers,

Today begins a two week call for adoption of draft-venaas-pim-reserved-bits-01. We had a good discussion on this draft in Montreal and now need formal support/non-support feedback from you on adoption of this draft.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-venaas-pim-reserved-bits/

thanks,
mike

---

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2018 08:30:25 +0800 (CST)

Support.

Thanks,

Sandy

原始邮件

发件人：MichaelMcBride <[email-masked]>
收件人：[email-masked] <[email-masked]>
日 期 ：2018年09月18日 06:00
主 题 ：[pim] draft-venaas-pim-reserved-bits-01 Adoption Call

_______________________________________________
pim mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim

Hello pimers,

 

 

thanks,

mike

---

From: Stig Venaas <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2018 17:54:00 -0700

Hi

I'm responding to this as an author, not as chair.

I'm hoping for more responses, whether positive or negative. It is
frustrating how silent the WG is.

My impression from the discussion at the meeting was that people are
OK with the draft itself, but some people think that we should not
work on extending the type space until it is needed. If people prefer,
I could split this draft into one draft to create the registry for
reserved bits which is purely procedural/administrative, and another
for the type space extension. Let me know if you have thoughts on
this.

Do people agree that the method of extending the type space is
reasonable, and that we should not assign any new types without first
extending the type space? If we do not, we will have less bits
available for type extension.

There are proposals like draft-ramki-pim-null-register-packing that
would require new types. I'm hoping people that support that draft, or
want new types for other reasons would support extending the type
space.

Thoughts? I need your feedback so I know what the WG wants me to do
with this draft, if anything.

Thanks,
Stig

---

From: "Mankamana Mishra (mankamis)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2018 01:31:54 +0000

Support adoption of document . I do not agree to argument that we should work on problem which we have not yet hit .

It’s always good to be proactive .

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 17, 2018, at 15:00, Michael McBride <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:

Hello pimers,

thanks,
mike
_______________________________________________
pim mailing list
[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim

---

From: "Holland, Jake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2018 16:55:57 +0000

I support adoption.

I wasn't there for the discussion, but it seems reasonable to expect we'll run out of type space, and it seems to me like a problem worth fixing before it blocks other work.

Best,
Jake

On 2018-09-21, 17:54, "Stig Venaas" <[email-masked]> wrote:

    Hi

    

    
    
    Thanks,
    Stig

---

From: Mahesh Sivakumar <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2018 10:25:58 -0700

Support adoption. Agree that it is reasonable to expect to run out of type
space sooner than later.

Thanks
Mahesh

On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 10:00 AM Holland, Jake <jholland=
[email-masked]> wrote:

> I support adoption.
>
> I wasn't there for the discussion, but it seems reasonable to expect we'll
> run out of type space, and it seems to me like a problem worth fixing
> before it blocks other work.
>
> Best,
> Jake
>
>     > Today begins a two week call for adoption of
> draft-venaas-pim-reserved-bits-01. We had a good discussion on this draft
> in Montreal and now need formal support/non-support feedback from you on
> adoption of this draft.
>     >
>     >
>     >