Subject: [Detnet] Please consider WG AP for draft-mirsky-detnet-mpls-oam

From: Greg Mirsky <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2020 09:07:02 +0100

Dear All,
back in Singapore, our Chairs asked WG whether there is support for the
adoption of draft-mirsky-detnet-mpls-oam
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mirsky-detnet-mpls-oam/>. From the
meeting minutes:

Greg Mirsky: Authors believe draft provides viable technical solution, and
would like to request WG adoption of OAM draft.
Lou Berger: Didn't adopt last time since few had read it. Today will do
adoption call for support.

My recollection is that there were more in support comparing to IETF-105.
The authors of the draft believe that the draft is ready for WG AP and
appreciate WG Chairs to consider starting the WG AP.

Regards,
Greg, on behalf of the authors

---

From: Lou Berger <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2020 08:38:02 -0500

Greg,

     We have no objections to starting the call and will do so shortly.

What are your plans for detnet-ip-oam?  The last update still had some 
TBD sections and we would like to get to the point where we could adopt 
this document as well.

Lou (and Janos)

On 3/4/2020 3:07 AM, Greg Mirsky wrote:
> Dear All,
> back in Singapore, our Chairs asked WG whether there is support for 
> the adoption of draft-mirsky-detnet-mpls-oam 
> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mirsky-detnet-mpls-oam/>. From 
> the meeting minutes:
>
>     Greg Mirsky: Authors believe draft provides viable technical
>     solution, and would like to request WG adoption of OAM draft.
>     Lou Berger: Didn't adopt last time since few had read it. Today
>     will do adoption call for support.
>
> My recollection is that there were more in support comparing to 
> IETF-105. The authors of the draft believe that the draft is ready for 
> WG AP and appreciate WG Chairs to consider starting the WG AP.
>
> Regards,

---

From: Greg Mirsky <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2020 23:54:22 +0100

Hi Lou,
thank you and Janos for your kind consideration of ou work and starting the
WG AP.
Regarding the detnet-ip-oam, I believe that we have a good handle on IPv6
and need to iron the IPv4 case. I was hoping to use f2f time at IETF-107
but, due to the circumstances, will go with the tools available. We'll
expedite the work to update it for the WG review and discussion.

Regards,
Greg