Subject: Re: [GROW] WG Adoption call for:draft-hilliard-ix-bgp-route-server-operations

From: Robert Raszuk <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 12:44:46 +0200

Chairs,

What is the status of route-server-operations draft ? We had some 
acceptances in the GROW WG meeting and on the list before, but we never 
saw official approvals to resubmit as official GROW WG document.

Many thx,
R.

> Hi Chris, GROW,
>
> I'd like to voice my support for this draft's adoption by GROW - it
> seems to me that there are particular complexities of operating route
> servers at IXPs well, and their stability and functionality is of
> particular interest to Internet network operators - making this draft
> very relevant for this group.
>
> Kind regards, r.
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 17 Nov 2011, at 07:55, "Christopher
> Morrow"<[email-masked]>  wrote:
>
>> Pursuant to the WG meeting discussion, this is a split part of the
>> original routeservers document, we'd like to poll the group for WG
>> Adoption at this time.
>>
>> <http://tools.ietf.org/html?draft=draft-hilliard-ix-bgp-route-server-operations>
>>
>>
>>
Please have a read through and let us know on-list about applicability
>> to this group in particular. Call closes 12/01/2011 (dec 01 2011
>> for the non-us-based folks)
>>
>> -Chris (co-chair) _______________________________________________
>> GROW mailing list [email-masked]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow

---

From: Christopher Morrow <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 06:46:47 -0400

we had only 2 notes about it, both positive....
could we have a little more chat about it pls? 2 people is not
necessarily a consensus...

On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 6:44 AM, Robert Raszuk <[email-masked]> wrote:
> acceptances in the GROW WG meeting and on the list before, but we never saw
> official approvals to resubmit as official GROW WG document.
>
> Many thx,
> R.
>
>
>> Hi Chris, GROW,
>>

---

From: Robert Raszuk <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 12:51:52 +0200

Hello Chris,

There was a bit more support both on the list and in the meetings for 
Route Servers. But it was under different name 
draft-jasinska-ix-bgp-route-server. Then IDR/GROW chairs decided to 
split the documents and now what is left in GROW is 
draft-hilliard-ix-bgp-route-server-operations.

The other draft went to IDR and is an IDR WG doc: 
draft-ietf-idr-ix-bgp-route-server since 26th of March.

Many thx,
R.

> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 6:44 AM, Robert Raszuk<[email-masked]>  wrote:
>> Chairs,
>>