Subject: Fwd: [v6ops] IETF 101 Agenda development

From: Ole Troan <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 21:46:53 +0100

Hi,

Bob and I have looked at draft-fioccola-v6ops-ipv6-alt-mark.
It is a document targeted for standards track (although based on an experimental RFC 8321) redefining bits of the flow label field in the IPv6 header.

We think this therefore belongs in the 6man working group.

Best regards,
Ole and Bob

> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> From: "Van De Velde, Gunter (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)" <[email-masked]>
> Subject: Re: [v6ops] IETF 101 Agenda development
> Date: 26 February 2018 at 16:22:14 CET
> To: Fred Baker <[email-masked]>, V6 Ops List <[email-masked]>
> 
> Hi Fred, Chairs,
> 
> We would like to ask a slot to discuss new draft ' draft-fioccola-v6ops-ipv6-alt-mark' regarding passive flow measurements in native IPv6 networks using IPv6 tunnel structures (i.e. SRv6). The presenter for the slot will be Guiseppe Fioccola.
> 
> Name:		draft-fioccola-v6ops-ipv6-alt-mark
> Revision:	00
> Title:		IPv6 Performance Measurement with Alternate Marking Method
> URL:            https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-fioccola-v6ops-ipv6-alt-mark-00.txt
> 
> Abstract:
>   This document describes how the alternate marking method can be used
>   as the passive performance measurement method in an IPv6 domain, and
>   will discuss the strengths and the weaknesses of the implementation
>   options available to network operations.
> 
> G/
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: v6ops [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Fred Baker
> Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 19:57
> To: V6 Ops List <[email-masked]>
> Subject: [v6ops] IETF 101 Agenda development
> 
> The chairs are pulling together the agenda for IETF 101.
> 
> We have a proposed talk from Mythic Beasts, which is a data center operation that is focused on IPv6-only operation using Raspberry Pi platforms (they have IPv4 for customers, but charge for addresses, where IPv6 addresses are free, and they find customers willing to go IPv6-only when money comes into the discussion), and two working group drafts. Fred Templin has been suggesting draft-templin-v6ops-pdhost as a working group draft, but we see little responding discussion, and infer that the working group doesn't find enough of value in the draft to support it.
> 
> If you have a document to update (Jen and Russ, that's you) or a new document to post for discussion, now would be the time to do it. The draft cut-off is Monday 2018-03-05, two weeks hence, and the chairs will be looking for email traffic on drafts posted to see whether there is working group interest.
> 
> WG: Unupdated WG Document
> 	2017-10-09	draft-ietf-v6ops-conditional-ras
> 
> WG: Updated WG Document
> 	2018-01-02	draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6rtr-reqs
> 
> Individual Submission: Unupdated
> 	2017-10-30	draft-palet-v6ops-ipv6-only
> 	2017-10-30	draft-shytyi-v6ops-danir
> 	2017-10-29	draft-palet-v6ops-he-reporting
> 	2017-10-29	draft-palet-v6ops-p2p-from-customer-prefix
> 	2017-10-17	draft-palet-v6ops-rfc7084-bis-transition
> 	2017-10-17	draft-xli-v6ops-cernet-deployment
> 	2017-10-09	draft-palet-v6ops-464xlat-deployment
> 	2017-08-28	draft-xu-v6ops-dslite-redundancy
> 
> Individual Submission: Updated
> 	2017-12-19	draft-templin-v6ops-pdhost
> 
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops