From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B783C47082 for ; Mon, 31 May 2021 12:04:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2E786135C for ; Mon, 31 May 2021 12:04:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231436AbhEaMF7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 May 2021 08:05:59 -0400 Received: from serv108.segi.ulg.ac.be ([139.165.32.111]:41920 "EHLO serv108.segi.ulg.ac.be" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231245AbhEaMFz (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 May 2021 08:05:55 -0400 Received: from mbx12-zne.ulg.ac.be (serv470.segi.ulg.ac.be [139.165.32.199]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by serv108.segi.ulg.ac.be (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30CC9200BBBF; Mon, 31 May 2021 14:04:14 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 serv108.segi.ulg.ac.be 30CC9200BBBF DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=uliege.be; s=ulg20190529; t=1622462654; bh=oBMvi5LXFH8jmfuLZrnygosixJKiUuvq9ERtrgVvdSw=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:From; b=cO6MZCHTv+hLYA8kbbBVjvfAail6zGKvgGtc2UEQeOBklpQymM74S/gjMwaut3wW5 bVgaJQ0mV8u7Sdc/kI9yisJ/99JdZVQ8WX/53viZN4DMdLrCod2QJqXvGM60J9JdJj varCV0WiXqNQ7DUnnfJCZHlRYVPt1UQL4z0+5AbuMucJWvR3EHeoK8SvSHL4UqvjC5 Pqp4I8IOIYA0wI42DPsQV4qyd9Ab8kd7v8cahymQonoqSuzIrCy1oRTiGPliacYDM+ r3oLbvNlH2EP5conFUEZyxN3/1XnZ+d1p4zfBgnhNdDcB1GE0t1NqqyWCG4sqkYrpX Ho1zDXJxwlFBg== Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mbx12-zne.ulg.ac.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27AD16008D58E; Mon, 31 May 2021 14:04:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mbx12-zne.ulg.ac.be ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mbx12-zne.ulg.ac.be [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id elLTnSQnqr9Z; Mon, 31 May 2021 14:04:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mbx12-zne.ulg.ac.be (mbx12-zne.ulg.ac.be [139.165.32.199]) by mbx12-zne.ulg.ac.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 112346008D55E; Mon, 31 May 2021 14:04:14 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 31 May 2021 14:04:14 +0200 (CEST) From: Justin Iurman Reply-To: Justin Iurman To: David Ahern Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, tom@herbertland.com Message-ID: <1439349685.35359322.1622462654030.JavaMail.zimbra@uliege.be> In-Reply-To: References: <20210527151652.16074-1-justin.iurman@uliege.be> <85a22702-da46-30c2-46c9-66d293d510ff@gmail.com> <1049853171.33683948.1622305441066.JavaMail.zimbra@uliege.be> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 0/5] Support for the IOAM Pre-allocated Trace with IPv6 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [81.240.24.148] X-Mailer: Zimbra 8.8.15_GA_4018 (ZimbraWebClient - FF88 (Linux)/8.8.15_GA_4026) Thread-Topic: Support for the IOAM Pre-allocated Trace with IPv6 Thread-Index: canxdIAORlXtsVJJiW/0LnB5yhrk1A== Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org >> Actually, February 2021 is the last update. The main draft >> (draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data) has already come a long way (version 12) and has >> already been Submitted to IESG for Publication. I don't think it would hurt > > when the expected decision on publication? Hard to tell precisely, a couple weeks probably. There are still some comment/discuss to clear and our next IETF working group meeting is in July. However, it shouldn't be a concern (see below). > that much to have it in the kernel as we're talking about a stable > draft (the other one is just a wrapper to define the encapsulation of > IOAM with IPv6) and something useful. And, if you think about Segment > Routing for IPv6, it was merged in the kernel when it was still a draft. > > The harm is if there are any changes to the uapi. Definitely agree. But, I can assure you there won't be any uapi change at this stage. None of the comment/discuss I mentioned above are about this at all. Headers definition and IANA codes are defined for a long time now and won't change anymore.