You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
29. Why do we need an agnostic mechanisms instead of just hacking into existing mechanism individually? This adds to why having a single WG to focus on a technology agnostic mechanism would be useful before various data plane encapsulations are developed separately. From: Dhruv Dhody
#29
Open
APN-Github opened this issue
Jan 25, 2022
· 0 comments
The APN Header is described in the draft https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-apn-header/, and it can be encapsulated in different data planes as requested in different network scenarios, e.g. its encapsulation in the IPv6 data plane as described in this draft https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-apn-ipv6-encap/.
In the APN wiki https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/apn/documents/, we can see that currently the APN’s work covers data plane, control plane and management plane. Although they are just some initial work, it can already show that APN is going to be a self-contained set of work. Doing this work without a common focus point would be very difficult to coordinate across multiple WGs. Taking IOAM and SPRING as examples, it is important to have a common place (IPPM, SPRING WG) where the consensus can be developed before extending various data planes across WGs that own it.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The APN Header is described in the draft https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-apn-header/, and it can be encapsulated in different data planes as requested in different network scenarios, e.g. its encapsulation in the IPv6 data plane as described in this draft https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-apn-ipv6-encap/.
In the APN wiki https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/apn/documents/, we can see that currently the APN’s work covers data plane, control plane and management plane. Although they are just some initial work, it can already show that APN is going to be a self-contained set of work. Doing this work without a common focus point would be very difficult to coordinate across multiple WGs. Taking IOAM and SPRING as examples, it is important to have a common place (IPPM, SPRING WG) where the consensus can be developed before extending various data planes across WGs that own it.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: