Subject: [Detnet-dp-dt] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-dt-detnet-dp-sol-02.txt

From: Loa Andersson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 11:15:35 +0200

Lou and Pat,

We posted the updated version, are we ready to go to a poll to accept it
as a working group document?

/Loa

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: New Version Notification for draft-dt-detnet-dp-sol-02.txt
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2017 04:55:43 -0700
From: [email-masked]
To: Carlos J. Bernardos <[email-masked]>, Norman Finn 
<[email-masked]>, Tal Mizrahi <[email-masked]>, Carlos 
Bernardos <[email-masked]>, Balázs Varga <[email-masked]>, 
Janos Farkas <[email-masked]>, Balazs Varga 
<[email-masked]>, Jouni Korhonen <[email-masked]>, 
Loa Andersson <[email-masked]>, Lou Berger <[email-masked]>, Yuanlong Jiang 
<[email-masked]>

A new version of I-D, draft-dt-detnet-dp-sol-02.txt
has been successfully submitted by Jouni Korhonen and posted to the
IETF repository.

Name:		draft-dt-detnet-dp-sol
Revision:	02
Title:		DetNet Data Plane Encapsulation
Document date:	2017-09-07
Group:		Individual Submission
Pages:		36
URL: 
https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-dt-detnet-dp-sol-02.txt
Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dt-detnet-dp-sol/
Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dt-detnet-dp-sol-02
Htmlized: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-dt-detnet-dp-sol-02
Diff:           https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-dt-detnet-dp-sol-02

Abstract:
    This document specifies Deterministic Networking data plane
    encapsulation solutions.  The described data plane solutions can be
    applied over either IP or MPLS Packet Switched Networks.

    Comment #1:  SB> An overarching comment is that the early part of the
      document is really fundamental architecture and perhaps belongs in
      the arch draft, leaving this draft to be more specific about
      solutions.  Indeed if we cannot find a single solution that maps to
      both IP and MPLS underlays I wonder if we should publish two
      specialist RFCs?

    Discussion:  One document at the beginning, split into two if/when
      needed.  Would be post adoption in any case.

    Comment #2:  SB> Whilst I think we should look for a common solution
      to IP and MPLS I do not think that this is where the DT ended up.

    Discussion:  Agree.

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

The IETF Secretariat

-- 

Loa Andersson                        email: [email-masked]
Senior MPLS Expert                          [email-masked]
Huawei Technologies (consultant)     phone: +46 739 81 21 64

---

From: Lou Berger <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 08:10:05 -0400

Loa,

It would be good for the authors to provide an update to the WG on the
changes in the version and the Author's expected next step.  This will
prompt folks, i.e., those who commented, to take a look as well as help
us (chairs) out.

Thanks,

Lou

---

From: Jouni <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2017 21:04:33 +0300

Okay.

- Jouni

> On 12 Sep 2017, at 15:10, Lou Berger <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> Loa,
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Detnet-dp-dt mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet-dp-dt