Hi Fernando, My understanding on the Consensus expressed by Martin is that the SPRING WG has reached consensus on the direction of progressing this draft including what to improve in the draft and how to improve. What was left is just to update the text. Now a new version of the draft has been posted with the new text based on the suggestions posted over the mailing list. You could have a further review and see whether you have any comments. Best regards, Shuping -----Original Message----- From: spring [mailto:spring-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Fernando Gont Sent: Thursday, March 5, 2020 8:15 AM To: Martin Vigoureux <martin.vigoureux@xxxxxxxxx>; spring@xxxxxxxx Cc: 'ietf@xxxxxxxx' <ietf@xxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: [spring] WGLC - draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming Martin, On 4/3/20 18:02, Martin Vigoureux wrote: > WG, > > I wanted to bring more context to my decision. > > This document has received a lot of valuable reviews and comments > which improved it. That served me as a base to determine consensus on > the overall document. > > The point I'd like to insist on is the one I was mentioning in my > previous e-mail. In my view, the remaining prominent discussion (and > tension) point was about the text of 8200, its implications on the > optional PSP capability, and the ramifications of it. > I have determined there is rough consensus, in SPRING, on the way to > read the specific text of 8200, but also that certain aspects go > beyond SPRING and would benefit from being discussed with a wider community. > > > I'd like to remind that this was a WG Chair level decision. Indeed, > Bruno still needs to produce the shepherd write-up and submit the > document for publication. May I ask what's the status of this I-D? - On one hand, both Bruno and you declared consensus to move it forward. On another hand, the authors keep making changes to address comments (good) so what the wg will ship will be very different from the document on which you claimed consensus. Besides, the datatracker lists the document as "in WGLC", as opposed to "Waiting for WG Chair Go-Ahead" or "WG Consensus: Waiting for Write-Up". Last, but not least, are you planning to do a second WGLC? Thanks, -- Fernando Gont e-mail: fernando@xxxxxxxxxxx || fgont@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1 _______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
