Dear WG: While the chairs strongly appreciate the engagement in the discussions around the SRv6 compression draft, several topics have gotten tangled, and the subject lines do not help track the conversation. Following this note will be two messages intended to serve as an anchor for separate aspects of the discussion related to this document. If we get the descriptions wrong, please correct us. If there are other concerns (quite likely, given the engagement), please start separate threads.
One discussion aspect has been whether SRv6 should have a distinct Ethertype. The intarea WG has discussed an existing proposal [1]. To avoid fragmentation, please move the discussion on this topic to the intarea mailing list. Copying spring and 6man is appropriate. We note that various descriptions on email have been unclear as to what is required of whom ([1] has a specific proposal). Please be clear about what is proposed/requested. Thanks! Alvaro -- for spring-chairs [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-raviolli-intarea-trusted-domain-srv6/ _______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
