Subject: [OPSAWG] 🔔 WG Adoption Call for draft-tuexen-opsawg-pcapng-03

From: Henk Birkholz <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2021 22:00:48 +0200

Dear OPSAWG members,

this starts a call for Working Group Adoption of

> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-tuexen-opsawg-pcapng-03

ending on Monday, October 18th.

As a reminder, this I-D describes the PCAPng format - the successor of 
the PCAP format - retaining the established design patterns and adding 
new capabilities as well as a an extensibility feature.

Please reply with your support and especially any substantive comments 
you may have.

For the OPSAWG co-chairs,

Henk

---

From: Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2021 16:44:59 -0400

Henk, thank you for initiating this.

As requested during previous discussions, I have removed the systemd block,
and the experimental block types from the document.  The WG could put some or
all of them back in as it sees fit.
This is shown at:
  https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-tuexen-opsawg-pcapng-03&url2=draft-tuexen-opsawg-pcapng-04
I had some challenges getting the MT makefiles to actually produce version
-04, so I invoked kdrfc -3 directly and uploaded that.  So the bit at the top
about the WG and github got deleted.

I have moved the old text to:
  https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-richardson-opsawg-pcapng-extras/

all in the same repo at: [email-masked]:pcapng/pcapng.git
(I really don't understand the tag system. It never seems to do what I want)

--
]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh networks [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        |    IoT architect   [
]     [email-masked]  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails    [

---

From: Henk Birkholz <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2021 22:22:21 +0200

Dear OPSAWG members,

this email *extends* the ongoing call for Working Group Adoption on 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-tuexen-opsawg-pcapng-03 
until *Sunday, October 24th*.

We did not reach a critical mass of positive replies - as a result, I'll 
grant a grace period until the end of the week. If you are interested in 
this work, please reply with your support on this list until *Sunday, 
October 24th*.

Henk

On 04.10.21 22:00, Henk Birkholz wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> OPSAWG mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

---

From: Carsten Bormann <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2021 22:49:55 +0200

> On 2021-10-20, at 22:22, Henk Birkholz <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> Dear OPSAWG members,
> 
> this email *extends* the ongoing call for Working Group Adoption on https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-tuexen-opsawg-pcapng-03 until *Sunday, October 24th*.

While the original pcap format has held up very well over time, a more modern format is needed for some applications.  Pcapng is widely agreed to be that(*), and publishing a specification that has had input from the operational community is an important next step.
I support WG adoption of this draft.

Grüße, Carsten

(*) even if I would have preferred it to use CBOR — but CBOR would have had to be around much earlier to enable that choice.

---

From: Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2021 15:51:52 -0400

Carsten Bormann <[email-masked]> wrote:
    > While the original pcap format has held up very well over time, a more
    > modern format is needed for some applications.  Pcapng is widely agreed
    > to be that(*), and publishing a specification that has had input from
    > the operational community is an important next step.  I support WG
    > adoption of this draft.

    > (*) even if I would have preferred it to use CBOR — but CBOR would have
    > had to be around much earlier to enable that choice.

There are a number ways in which I'd like to extend pcapng, and CBOR would
fit nicely them.

--
Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

---

From: Eliot Lear <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2021 19:57:47 +0200

I support the adoption of this draft as well as the pcap draft. My 
presumption is that we will memorialize pcap and further work might be 
done on pcapng.

On 21.10.21 21:51, Michael Richardson wrote:
> Carsten Bormann<[email-masked]>  wrote:
> Michael Richardson<[email-masked]>    . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )

---

From: Henk Birkholz <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2021 22:56:44 +0200

Dear OPSAWG members,

this email concludes the call for Working Group Adoption on 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-tuexen-opsawg-pcapng-03.

We did not reach a critical mass of positive replies, but there were 
also no objections, and various elaborate comments (in addition to 
various comments on potential adoption in 2020).

The chairs believe that this work is interesting to adopt, but we also 
have to make sure that there is enough commitment wrt contribution and 
review. Looking at a list of seven authors, it seems to me that there is 
enough involvement to advance this work in OPSAWG.

My recommendation to the authors is to discuss the issue of review 
commitment at the IETF 112 meeting's OPSAWG session and we can go from 
there.

Henk