Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

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

Comments

@APN-Github
Copy link
Contributor

APN-Github commented Jan 25, 2022

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.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant