SRv6 Segment Identifiers in the IPv6 Addressing Architecture
draft-ietf-6man-sids-06

Approval announcement
Draft of message to be sent after approval:

Announcement

From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Cc: 6man-chairs@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, bob.hinden@gmail.com, draft-ietf-6man-sids@ietf.org, ek.ietf@gmail.com, furry13@gmail.com, ipv6@ietf.org, otroan@employees.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Subject: Document Action: 'SRv6 Segment Identifiers in the IPv6 Addressing Architecture' to Informational RFC (draft-ietf-6man-sids-06.txt)

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'SRv6 Segment Identifiers in the IPv6 Addressing Architecture'
  (draft-ietf-6man-sids-06.txt) as Informational RFC

This document is the product of the IPv6 Maintenance Working Group.

The IESG contact persons are Erik Kline and Éric Vyncke.

A URL of this Internet-Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-6man-sids/

Ballot Text

Technical Summary

   The data plane for Segment Routing over IPv6 (SRv6) is built using
   IPv6 as the underlying forwarding plane.  Due to this underlying use
   of IPv6, Segment Identifiers (SIDs) used by SRv6 can resemble IPv6
   addresses and behave like them while exhibiting slightly different
   behaviors in some situations.  This document explores the
   characteristics of SRv6 SIDs and to clarify the relationship of SRv6
   SIDs to the IPv6 Addressing Architecture.

Working Group Summary

   This document was drafted in response to 6MAN and SPRING working group
   exchanges on the implications of compressed SIDs. This document itself
   was not the subject of any heated debate. 

Document Quality

   Special thanks to Suresh Krishnan for taking up the authorship pen to
   write this document in response to 6MAN and SPRING discussions.

Personnel

   The Document Shepherd for this document is Jen Linkova. The Responsible
   Area Director is Erik Kline.

IANA Note

  This document makes a prefix allocation request of IANA (section 6 of -05).

RFC Editor Note