From nobody Thu Dec 4 05:28:59 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C671C1AD391; Thu, 4 Dec 2014 05:28:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9h40nAbszOlK; Thu, 4 Dec 2014 05:28:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp3.iomartmail.com (asmtp3.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.159]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E21C1A1AA1; Thu, 4 Dec 2014 05:28:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp3.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp3.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id sB4DSAC7009167; Thu, 4 Dec 2014 13:28:10 GMT Received: from 950129200 (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp3.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id sB4DS9tG009159 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 4 Dec 2014 13:28:09 GMT From: "Adrian Farrel" To: Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2014 13:28:04 -0000 Message-ID: <0ecc01d00fc6$22b6a200$6823e600$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AdAPxYq739rFLqf7Qhamy+PhTxIAKw== Content-Language: en-gb X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.1.0.1576-7.5.0.1018-21148.006 X-TM-AS-Result: No--8.055-10.0-31-10 X-imss-scan-details: No--8.055-10.0-31-10 X-TMASE-MatchedRID: 5oY9ed+hvrhCOvS9tkY1y/HkpkyUphL9Ud7Bjfo+5jSOtR/F4zYXtD11 qDA2H+XsFXq3kuUpln/DBTLepRHdOLqO765EzZu1aDCzqDR7DPZr9+Kgn2XgeLgqSDn2azAXJfE nM+Njj0JX0J7bmQn97C1wfr4XhoCp3dF9isWdTYapuD25aEtgt/ioIsi7Sa0gsneuamRRT5M6W3 3UwHDV5uLzNWBegCW2XC3N7C7YzrdWRVlrjsKO8N0H8LFZNFG7hqz53n/yPnrRsFfpz3VdOhFe0 fZP7b0BL1c1n2FhAs8JYDRRryi7zt/T49kdKys+ Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dir/n7HtUbh1_l3_AeDY_kxYlO1ynBA Cc: rtg-dir@ietf.org Subject: [RTG-DIR] Second call for help with a VRRP Errata Report X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2014 13:28:48 -0000 Second appeal for help. Also including the Routing Directorate. Thanks, Adrian > -----Original Message----- > From: vrrp [mailto:vrrp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel > Sent: 18 November 2014 18:24 > To: vrrp@ietf.org > Subject: [VRRP] Help needed with a VRRP Errata Report > > Hi VRRP enthusiasts, > > A report has been submitted against RFC6527, "Definitions of Managed Objects > for > Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol Version 3 (VRRPv3)". You can see it at > http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6527&eid=4168 > > The essence is that the Description clause of the vrrpv3OperationsAcceptMode > object appears to limit its meaning to IPv6 addresses. However, section 6.1 of > RFC 5798 describes Accept_Mode as applying to IPvX which implies IPv4 or IPv6. > > Instruction 635 does appear to be limited to IPv6, but instruction 650 is > clearly relevant to both IPv4 and IPv6. > > I think the report is correct. > > Opinions? > > Thanks, > Adrian > > _______________________________________________ > vrrp mailing list > vrrp@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vrrp From nobody Thu Dec 4 06:19:39 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DA201AD3D4; Thu, 4 Dec 2014 06:19:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.511 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CtckCc0PZ_t4; Thu, 4 Dec 2014 06:19:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from alln-iport-2.cisco.com (alln-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.142.89]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2AA9E1A701D; Thu, 4 Dec 2014 06:19:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1835; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1417702776; x=1418912376; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=OKm6AnuJQIz32GMbrwxaiV6QFXdoMipeo1nlus7Vruc=; b=VOGW3PirbHYUP8GW7H1soNRxYGSOi0Sn3RaJhsQaBhM1PIT4/mhu6j9n jRXQGTd9UBJzAoa0l2oNidnYblhKtuSpmVEakvkxY8tamtwTWMTIjX+bq SGdOuKTsSnvqgswiCBMoQkbUb4My54tmVv9b2cbrQkPGrniTboDHz3+3H A=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ai4FAKxsgFStJV2R/2dsb2JhbABAGoMGUlgExkYKhhYCgRwWAQEBAQF9hAIBAQEEAQEBGh00CwwEAgEIEQQBAR8JBycLFAkIAQEEAQ0FiD4NONV4AQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBF40EgwoBVwcGhDwFkBCKSpQXg3lvARJwAR8igQABAQE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.07,515,1413244800"; d="scan'208";a="102650956" Received: from rcdn-core-9.cisco.com ([173.37.93.145]) by alln-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 04 Dec 2014 14:19:35 +0000 Received: from xhc-rcd-x09.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x09.cisco.com [173.37.183.83]) by rcdn-core-9.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id sB4EJYg7024898 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 4 Dec 2014 14:19:34 GMT Received: from xmb-aln-x06.cisco.com ([169.254.1.12]) by xhc-rcd-x09.cisco.com ([173.37.183.83]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Thu, 4 Dec 2014 08:19:34 -0600 From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" To: "adrian@olddog.co.uk" , "vrrp@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [RTG-DIR] Second call for help with a VRRP Errata Report Thread-Index: AdAPxYq739rFLqf7Qhamy+PhTxIAKwAECmAA Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2014 14:19:33 +0000 Message-ID: References: <0ecc01d00fc6$22b6a200$6823e600$@olddog.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <0ecc01d00fc6$22b6a200$6823e600$@olddog.co.uk> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.116.152.199] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dir/7nU0g_-2_Ji1KxXq2gOL0BCJXHg Cc: "rtg-dir@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] Second call for help with a VRRP Errata Report X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2014 14:19:37 -0000 Hi Adrian,=20 I agree with the errata. Accept_Mode applies to both IPv4 and IPv6. The RFC 6527 author may have been confused by the statement that IPv6 Neighbor Solicitations and Neighbor Advertisements (i.e., the address resolution mechanism in ND) must be accept when Accept_Mode is FALSE. Thanks, Acee=20 P.S. I have never implemented VRRPv3 but reviewed the document prior to publication and have implemented VRRPv2 twice and have overseen the implementation of a proprietary extension equivalent RFC 5798 Accept_Mode. On 12/4/14, 8:28 AM, "Adrian Farrel" wrote: >Second appeal for help. Also including the Routing Directorate. > >Thanks, >Adrian > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: vrrp [mailto:vrrp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel >> Sent: 18 November 2014 18:24 >> To: vrrp@ietf.org >> Subject: [VRRP] Help needed with a VRRP Errata Report >>=20 >> Hi VRRP enthusiasts, >>=20 >> A report has been submitted against RFC6527, "Definitions of Managed >>Objects >> for >> Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol Version 3 (VRRPv3)". You can see it >>at >> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3D6527&eid=3D4168 >>=20 >> The essence is that the Description clause of the >>vrrpv3OperationsAcceptMode >> object appears to limit its meaning to IPv6 addresses. However, section >>6.1 of >> RFC 5798 describes Accept_Mode as applying to IPvX which implies IPv4 >>or IPv6. >>=20 >> Instruction 635 does appear to be limited to IPv6, but instruction 650 >>is >> clearly relevant to both IPv4 and IPv6. >>=20 >> I think the report is correct. >>=20 >> Opinions? >>=20 >> Thanks, >> Adrian >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> vrrp mailing list >> vrrp@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vrrp > From nobody Fri Dec 5 00:51:03 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0AB51A8AB2; Thu, 4 Dec 2014 17:27:24 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.612 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.612 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zObxd38RQA3o; Thu, 4 Dec 2014 17:27:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from us.checkpoint.com (usmail2.us.checkpoint.com [209.87.220.146]) (using TLSv1 with cipher EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA (112/168 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1E1441A8AB4; Thu, 4 Dec 2014 17:27:22 -0800 (PST) x-m-msg: CPCHECK Received: from us-ex10c.ad.checkpoint.com (us-ex10c.us.checkpoint.com [209.87.220.100]) by us.checkpoint.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id sB51R6B0010368; Thu, 4 Dec 2014 17:27:09 -0800 X-CheckPoint: {548109EA-0-8ADC57D1-C0000002} Received: from US-EX10MB.ad.checkpoint.com ([fe80::6869:aef1:9ce3:14b8]) by US-EX10C.ad.checkpoint.com ([2002:d157:dc64::d157:dc64]) with mapi id 14.03.0174.001; Thu, 4 Dec 2014 17:27:05 -0800 From: "Kalyan (Srinivas)Tata" To: "adrian@olddog.co.uk" , "vrrp@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [VRRP] Second call for help with a VRRP Errata Report Thread-Index: AdAPxYq739rFLqf7Qhamy+PhTxIAKwAY2geQ Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2014 01:27:05 +0000 Message-ID: <70F762527E74224AB3A3BBC4AADC66A703581B41@US-EX10MB.ad.checkpoint.com> References: <0ecc01d00fc6$22b6a200$6823e600$@olddog.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <0ecc01d00fc6$22b6a200$6823e600$@olddog.co.uk> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [209.97.117.30] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dir/jPdjP1ar9DiD9IYkU1fIEApUlz0 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 05 Dec 2014 00:51:02 -0800 Cc: "rtg-dir@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] [VRRP] Second call for help with a VRRP Errata Report X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2014 01:27:25 -0000 Hi Adrian, The Errata Report is correct based on RFC 5798.=20 Thanks kalyan -----Original Message----- From: vrrp [mailto:vrrp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2014 5:28 AM To: vrrp@ietf.org Cc: rtg-dir@ietf.org Subject: [VRRP] Second call for help with a VRRP Errata Report Second appeal for help. Also including the Routing Directorate. Thanks, Adrian > -----Original Message----- > From: vrrp [mailto:vrrp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel > Sent: 18 November 2014 18:24 > To: vrrp@ietf.org > Subject: [VRRP] Help needed with a VRRP Errata Report >=20 > Hi VRRP enthusiasts, >=20 > A report has been submitted against RFC6527, "Definitions of Managed=20 > Objects for Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol Version 3 (VRRPv3)".=20 > You can see it at > http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3D6527&eid=3D4168 >=20 > The essence is that the Description clause of the=20 > vrrpv3OperationsAcceptMode object appears to limit its meaning to IPv6=20 > addresses. However, section 6.1 of RFC 5798 describes Accept_Mode as appl= ying to IPvX which implies IPv4 or IPv6. >=20 > Instruction 635 does appear to be limited to IPv6, but instruction 650=20 > is clearly relevant to both IPv4 and IPv6. >=20 > I think the report is correct. >=20 > Opinions? >=20 > Thanks, > Adrian >=20 > _______________________________________________ > vrrp mailing list > vrrp@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vrrp _______________________________________________ vrrp mailing list vrrp@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vrrp Email secured by Check Point. From nobody Thu Dec 11 23:51:23 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8392F1AC402; Thu, 11 Dec 2014 23:51:21 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.211 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Wz0X96hJ1DER; Thu, 11 Dec 2014 23:51:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 805401AC41F; Thu, 11 Dec 2014 23:51:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml403-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id BMT66100; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 07:51:15 +0000 (GMT) Received: from SZXEMA411-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.72.70) by lhreml403-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.217) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 07:51:14 +0000 Received: from SZXEMA510-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.3.118]) by szxema411-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.82.72.70]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 15:51:05 +0800 From: Mach Chen To: "rtg-dir@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: RtgDir Review: draft-ietf-idr-error-handling-16.txt Thread-Index: AdAV4F8QetZOpSa0RB+lZ3y6TL3fHw== Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2014 07:51:04 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.111.97.72] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dir/jJg_cvqq9RQLaGGa-KTfklIIOYU Cc: "idr@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-idr-error-handling@tools.ietf.org" , "rtg-ads@tools.ietf.org" Subject: [RTG-DIR] RtgDir Review: draft-ietf-idr-error-handling-16.txt X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2014 07:51:21 -0000 SGVsbG8sIA0KDQpJIGhhdmUgYmVlbiBzZWxlY3RlZCBhcyB0aGUgUm91dGluZyBEaXJlY3RvcmF0 ZSByZXZpZXdlciBmb3IgdGhpcyBkcmFmdC4gVGhlIFJvdXRpbmcgRGlyZWN0b3JhdGUgc2Vla3Mg dG8gcmV2aWV3IGFsbCByb3V0aW5nIG9yIHJvdXRpbmctcmVsYXRlZCBkcmFmdHMgYXMgdGhleSBw YXNzIHRocm91Z2ggSUVURiBsYXN0IGNhbGwgYW5kIElFU0cgcmV2aWV3LiBUaGUgcHVycG9zZSBv ZiB0aGUgcmV2aWV3IGlzIHRvIHByb3ZpZGUgYXNzaXN0YW5jZSB0byB0aGUgUm91dGluZyBBRHMu IEZvciBtb3JlIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIGFib3V0IHRoZSBSb3V0aW5nIERpcmVjdG9yYXRlLCBwbGVh c2Ugc2VlIOKAi2h0dHA6Ly90cmFjLnRvb2xzLmlldGYub3JnL2FyZWEvcnRnL3RyYWMvd2lraS9S dGdEaXIgDQoNCkFsdGhvdWdoIHRoZXNlIGNvbW1lbnRzIGFyZSBwcmltYXJpbHkgZm9yIHRoZSB1 c2Ugb2YgdGhlIFJvdXRpbmcgQURzLCBpdCB3b3VsZCBiZSBoZWxwZnVsIGlmIHlvdSBjb3VsZCBj b25zaWRlciB0aGVtIGFsb25nIHdpdGggYW55IG90aGVyIElFVEYgTGFzdCBDYWxsIGNvbW1lbnRz IHRoYXQgeW91IHJlY2VpdmUsIGFuZCBzdHJpdmUgdG8gcmVzb2x2ZSB0aGVtIHRocm91Z2ggZGlz Y3Vzc2lvbiBvciBieSB1cGRhdGluZyB0aGUgZHJhZnQuIA0KDQpEb2N1bWVudDogZHJhZnQtaWV0 Zi1pZHItZXJyb3ItaGFuZGxpbmctMTYudHh0IA0KUmV2aWV3ZXI6IE1hY2ggQ2hlbiANClJldmll dyBEYXRlOiBOb3YuIDEyLCAyMDE0IA0KSW50ZW5kZWQgU3RhdHVzOiBTdGFuZGFyZHMgVHJhY2sN Cg0KU3VtbWFyeTogDQogVGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudCBpcyB3ZWxsIHdyaXR0ZW4gYW5kIGVhc3kgdG8g dW5kZXJzdGFuZC4gSSBmb3VuZCBzb21lIG5pdHMgYW5kIG9uZSBtaW5vciBpc3N1ZSB0aGF0IEkg dGhpbmsgc2hvdWxkIGJlIHJlc29sdmVkIGJlZm9yZSBwdWJsaWNhdGlvbi4NCg0KQ29tbWVudHM6 IA0KIE5vbmUuDQoNCk1ham9yIElzc3VlczogDQogTm8gbWFqb3IgaXNzdWVzIGZvdW5kLiANCg0K TWlub3IgSXNzdWVzOiANCiBTZWN0aW9uIDcuMw0KICJUaGUgYXR0cmlidXRlIGlzIGNvbnNpZGVy ZWQgbWFsZm9ybWVkIGlmIGl0cyBsZW5ndGggaXMgbm90IDQgW1JGQzQyNzFdLiINCg0KIElmIG9u bHkgYWNjb3JkaW5nIHRvIFJGQzQyNzEsIHRoaXMgaXMgdGhlIGNhc2UsIGJ1dCBzZWVtcyB0aGF0 IFJGQzU1NDkgYWxsb3dzIHRoYXQgdGhlIGxlbmd0aCBvZiBOZXh0aG9wIGF0dHJpYnV0ZSBjYW4g YmUgZWl0aGVyIDQgb3IgMTYuDQoNCk5pdHM6IA0KIFNlY3Rpb24gMi4NCiBzL3RvIGhhbmRsaW5n L3RvIGhhbmRsZQ0KDQogaW4gdGhlIGxhc3QgYnVsbGV0IG9mIHRoZSA0IGFwcHJvYWNoZXMuDQog cy9tdXN0IG5vdC9NVVNUIE5PVA0KDQpCZXN0IHJlZ2FyZHMsDQpNYWNoDQoNCg== From nobody Fri Dec 12 05:34:29 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 030961A6F8C; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 05:34:26 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -99.055 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-99.055 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DOS_OUTLOOK_TO_MX=2.845, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LaLhGW7oE8Dl; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 05:34:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from hickoryhill-consulting.com (hhc-web3.hickoryhill-consulting.com [64.9.205.143]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 720351A1EEA; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 05:34:24 -0800 (PST) X-Default-Received-SPF: pass (skip=forwardok (res=PASS)) x-ip-name=66.201.48.54; From: "Susan Hares" To: "'Mach Chen'" , References: In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2014 08:34:18 -0500 Message-ID: <005f01d01610$55f17640$01d462c0$@ndzh.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQIAnW1QSiSJE+40s4AN+Kav/P1QU5wq5M1w Content-Language: en-us X-Authenticated-User: skh@ndzh.com Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dir/6xeax10NraDNI5mt840wPFwhoUU Cc: idr@ietf.org, draft-ietf-idr-error-handling@tools.ietf.org, rtg-ads@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] [Idr] RtgDir Review: draft-ietf-idr-error-handling-16.txt X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2014 13:34:26 -0000 Mach: Thank you for the routing directorate report. Thank you for the catch = on the RFC2119 language.=20 Sue=20 -----Original Message----- From: Idr [mailto:idr-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Mach Chen Sent: Friday, December 12, 2014 2:51 AM To: rtg-dir@ietf.org Cc: idr@ietf.org; draft-ietf-idr-error-handling@tools.ietf.org; = rtg-ads@tools.ietf.org Subject: [Idr] RtgDir Review: draft-ietf-idr-error-handling-16.txt Hello,=20 I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft. = The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related = drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review. The purpose = of the review is to provide assistance to the Routing ADs. For more = information about the Routing Directorate, please see = =E2=80=8Bhttp://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir=20 Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, it = would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF = Last Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through = discussion or by updating the draft.=20 Document: draft-ietf-idr-error-handling-16.txt=20 Reviewer: Mach Chen=20 Review Date: Nov. 12, 2014=20 Intended Status: Standards Track Summary:=20 This document is well written and easy to understand. I found some nits = and one minor issue that I think should be resolved before publication. Comments:=20 None. Major Issues:=20 No major issues found.=20 Minor Issues:=20 Section 7.3 "The attribute is considered malformed if its length is not 4 = [RFC4271]." If only according to RFC4271, this is the case, but seems that RFC5549 = allows that the length of Nexthop attribute can be either 4 or 16. Nits:=20 Section 2. s/to handling/to handle in the last bullet of the 4 approaches. s/must not/MUST NOT Best regards, Mach _______________________________________________ Idr mailing list Idr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr From nobody Fri Dec 12 06:38:30 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D8F51ACD86; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 06:38:27 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LBpElT6U-Mqc; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 06:38:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1bon0746.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::1:746]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 53FBC1ACD7C; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 06:38:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from msims-sslvpn-nc.jnpr.net (66.129.241.13) by CO2PR05MB730.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.228.15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.31.17; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 14:37:56 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) From: "John G. Scudder" In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2014 09:37:46 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: References: To: Mach Chen X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) X-Originating-IP: [66.129.241.13] X-ClientProxiedBy: CO2PR04CA034.namprd04.prod.outlook.com (10.141.240.162) To CO2PR05MB730.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.228.15) X-Microsoft-Antispam: UriScan:; X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:CO2PR05MB730; X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-Test: UriScan:; X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601003); SRVR:CO2PR05MB730; X-Forefront-PRVS: 04238CD941 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(377454003)(199003)(189002)(51704005)(24454002)(33656002)(69596002)(97736003)(82746002)(92566001)(77156002)(89996001)(83716003)(105586002)(106356001)(62966003)(68736005)(101416001)(20776003)(1720100001)(50986999)(76176999)(110136001)(21056001)(19580405001)(36756003)(77096005)(23676002)(64706001)(81156004)(107046002)(40100003)(57306001)(42186005)(50466002)(122386002)(4396001)(86362001)(120916001)(87976001)(31966008)(230783001)(46102003)(66066001)(47776003)(53416004)(99396003)(50226001)(104396002)(42262002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:CO2PR05MB730; H:msims-sslvpn-nc.jnpr.net; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:sfv; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:CO2PR05MB730; X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dir/KO9f7StdQRt0A8Fm_VUiZfWdDSU Cc: "rtg-dir@ietf.org" , "rtg-ads@tools.ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-idr-error-handling@tools.ietf.org" , "idr@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] RtgDir Review: draft-ietf-idr-error-handling-16.txt X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2014 14:38:27 -0000 Hi Mach, Thanks for your review and comments. I will make the changes and issue a = new version. Good catch on the RFC 5549 issue. Regards, --John On Dec 12, 2014, at 2:51 AM, Mach Chen wrote: > Hello,=20 >=20 > I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this = draft. The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or = routing-related drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG = review. The purpose of the review is to provide assistance to the = Routing ADs. For more information about the Routing Directorate, please = see =E2=80=8Bhttp://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir=20 >=20 > Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, = it would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF = Last Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through = discussion or by updating the draft.=20 >=20 > Document: draft-ietf-idr-error-handling-16.txt=20 > Reviewer: Mach Chen=20 > Review Date: Nov. 12, 2014=20 > Intended Status: Standards Track >=20 > Summary:=20 > This document is well written and easy to understand. I found some = nits and one minor issue that I think should be resolved before = publication. >=20 > Comments:=20 > None. >=20 > Major Issues:=20 > No major issues found.=20 >=20 > Minor Issues:=20 > Section 7.3 > "The attribute is considered malformed if its length is not 4 = [RFC4271]." >=20 > If only according to RFC4271, this is the case, but seems that RFC5549 = allows that the length of Nexthop attribute can be either 4 or 16. >=20 > Nits:=20 > Section 2. > s/to handling/to handle >=20 > in the last bullet of the 4 approaches. > s/must not/MUST NOT >=20 > Best regards, > Mach >=20 From nobody Fri Dec 12 10:56:32 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B0581A88C2; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 10:56:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IO-Zr7rt1QyC; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 10:56:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1on0799.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::799]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1D2DE1A7020; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 10:56:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from BY2PR05MB728.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.223.25) by BY2PR05MB127.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.242.38.24) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.31.17; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 18:56:02 +0000 Received: from msims-sslvpn-nc.jnpr.net (66.129.241.13) by BY2PR05MB728.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.223.25) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.31.17; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 18:55:59 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) From: "John G. Scudder" In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2014 13:55:49 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: <35D92225-7901-4D98-80E3-2415EC651484@juniper.net> References: To: Mach Chen X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) X-Originating-IP: [66.129.241.13] X-ClientProxiedBy: CY1PR09CA0026.namprd09.prod.outlook.com (25.160.223.36) To BY2PR05MB728.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.223.25) X-Microsoft-Antispam: UriScan:;UriScan:; X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BY2PR05MB728; X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-Test: UriScan:; X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601003); SRVR:BY2PR05MB728; X-Forefront-PRVS: 04238CD941 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(51704005)(377454003)(164054003)(24454002)(189002)(199003)(21056001)(122386002)(50226001)(4396001)(97736003)(76176999)(19580405001)(47776003)(50986999)(20776003)(66066001)(99396003)(31966008)(64706001)(82746002)(57306001)(89996001)(230783001)(69596002)(19580395003)(120916001)(107046002)(83716003)(1720100001)(86362001)(33656002)(77096005)(101416001)(23676002)(15975445007)(68736005)(42186005)(50466002)(62966003)(53416004)(81156004)(110136001)(46102003)(105586002)(87976001)(77156002)(92566001)(106356001)(104396002)(42262002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BY2PR05MB728; H:msims-sslvpn-nc.jnpr.net; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:sfv; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BY2PR05MB728; X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BY2PR05MB127; X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dir/-t3MyQkUQC0XQoP2ikMGRICQQzg Cc: "rtg-dir@ietf.org" , "idr@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-idr-error-handling@tools.ietf.org" , "rtg-ads@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] [Idr] RtgDir Review: draft-ietf-idr-error-handling-16.txt X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2014 18:56:29 -0000 Chris Hall kindly pointed out to me that RFC 5549 only relates to the = MP-BGP encoding and NOT the legacy NEXT_HOP attribute, and thus my last = change was in error. I've reverted that change and will post it as -18. = (The two editorial changes are still there.) Section 7.11 did already = capture the "4 or 16" point for MP_REACH_NLRI, so no change needed = there. Thanks, Chris! --John On Dec 12, 2014, at 9:37 AM, John G. Scudder wrote: > Hi Mach, >=20 > Thanks for your review and comments. I will make the changes and issue = a new version. Good catch on the RFC 5549 issue. >=20 > Regards, >=20 > --John >=20 > On Dec 12, 2014, at 2:51 AM, Mach Chen wrote: >=20 >> Hello,=20 >>=20 >> I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this = draft. The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or = routing-related drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG = review. The purpose of the review is to provide assistance to the = Routing ADs. For more information about the Routing Directorate, please = see =E2=80=8Bhttp://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir=20 >>=20 >> Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, = it would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF = Last Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through = discussion or by updating the draft.=20 >>=20 >> Document: draft-ietf-idr-error-handling-16.txt=20 >> Reviewer: Mach Chen=20 >> Review Date: Nov. 12, 2014=20 >> Intended Status: Standards Track >>=20 >> Summary:=20 >> This document is well written and easy to understand. I found some = nits and one minor issue that I think should be resolved before = publication. >>=20 >> Comments:=20 >> None. >>=20 >> Major Issues:=20 >> No major issues found.=20 >>=20 >> Minor Issues:=20 >> Section 7.3 >> "The attribute is considered malformed if its length is not 4 = [RFC4271]." >>=20 >> If only according to RFC4271, this is the case, but seems that = RFC5549 allows that the length of Nexthop attribute can be either 4 or = 16. >>=20 >> Nits:=20 >> Section 2. >> s/to handling/to handle >>=20 >> in the last bullet of the 4 approaches. >> s/must not/MUST NOT >>=20 >> Best regards, >> Mach >>=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Idr mailing list > Idr@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr From nobody Sun Dec 14 17:42:26 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 555271A0318; Sun, 14 Dec 2014 17:42:25 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.211 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EZrJJS0ii_QE; Sun, 14 Dec 2014 17:42:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C184E1A0302; Sun, 14 Dec 2014 17:42:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml404-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id BMV61280; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 01:42:21 +0000 (GMT) Received: from SZXEMA413-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.72.72) by lhreml404-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.218) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 01:42:20 +0000 Received: from SZXEMA510-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.3.118]) by SZXEMA413-HUB.china.huawei.com ([10.82.72.72]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 09:42:17 +0800 From: Mach Chen To: "John G. Scudder" Thread-Topic: [RTG-DIR] [Idr] RtgDir Review: draft-ietf-idr-error-handling-16.txt Thread-Index: AQHQFj1c1iZ0VGF+ckyQUjNVQTJvApyP4tLg Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 01:42:16 +0000 Message-ID: References: <35D92225-7901-4D98-80E3-2415EC651484@juniper.net> In-Reply-To: <35D92225-7901-4D98-80E3-2415EC651484@juniper.net> Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.111.97.72] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dir/6qfdANEJZCVr7-WHQ65zcEU6FNk Cc: "rtg-dir@ietf.org" , "rtg-ads@tools.ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-idr-error-handling@tools.ietf.org" , "idr@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] [Idr] RtgDir Review: draft-ietf-idr-error-handling-16.txt X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 01:42:25 -0000 SGkgSm9obiwNCg0KVGhhbmtzIGZvciB0aGUgZXhwbGFuYXRpb24sIGl0IGFkZHJlc3NlZCBteSBj b21tZW50cy4NCg0KQmVzdCByZWdhcmRzLA0KTWFjaA0KDQo+IC0tLS0tT3JpZ2luYWwgTWVzc2Fn ZS0tLS0tDQo+IEZyb206IHJ0Zy1kaXIgW21haWx0bzpydGctZGlyLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmdd IE9uIEJlaGFsZiBPZiBKb2huIEcuIFNjdWRkZXINCj4gU2VudDogU2F0dXJkYXksIERlY2VtYmVy IDEzLCAyMDE0IDI6NTYgQU0NCj4gVG86IE1hY2ggQ2hlbg0KPiBDYzogcnRnLWRpckBpZXRmLm9y ZzsgaWRyQGlldGYub3JnOyBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLWlkci1lcnJvci1oYW5kbGluZ0B0b29scy5pZXRm Lm9yZzsNCj4gcnRnLWFkc0B0b29scy5pZXRmLm9yZw0KPiBTdWJqZWN0OiBSZTogW1JURy1ESVJd IFtJZHJdIFJ0Z0RpciBSZXZpZXc6IGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtaWRyLWVycm9yLWhhbmRsaW5nLTE2LnR4 dA0KPiANCj4gQ2hyaXMgSGFsbCBraW5kbHkgcG9pbnRlZCBvdXQgdG8gbWUgdGhhdCBSRkMgNTU0 OSBvbmx5IHJlbGF0ZXMgdG8gdGhlIE1QLUJHUA0KPiBlbmNvZGluZyBhbmQgTk9UIHRoZSBsZWdh Y3kgTkVYVF9IT1AgYXR0cmlidXRlLCBhbmQgdGh1cyBteSBsYXN0IGNoYW5nZSB3YXMNCj4gaW4g ZXJyb3IuIEkndmUgcmV2ZXJ0ZWQgdGhhdCBjaGFuZ2UgYW5kIHdpbGwgcG9zdCBpdCBhcyAtMTgu IChUaGUgdHdvIGVkaXRvcmlhbA0KPiBjaGFuZ2VzIGFyZSBzdGlsbCB0aGVyZS4pIFNlY3Rpb24g Ny4xMSBkaWQgYWxyZWFkeSBjYXB0dXJlIHRoZSAiNCBvciAxNiIgcG9pbnQgZm9yDQo+IE1QX1JF QUNIX05MUkksIHNvIG5vIGNoYW5nZSBuZWVkZWQgdGhlcmUuDQo+IA0KPiBUaGFua3MsIENocmlz IQ0KPiANCj4gLS1Kb2huDQo+IA0KPiBPbiBEZWMgMTIsIDIwMTQsIGF0IDk6MzcgQU0sIEpvaG4g Ry4gU2N1ZGRlciA8amdzQGp1bmlwZXIubmV0PiB3cm90ZToNCj4gDQo+ID4gSGkgTWFjaCwNCj4g Pg0KPiA+IFRoYW5rcyBmb3IgeW91ciByZXZpZXcgYW5kIGNvbW1lbnRzLiBJIHdpbGwgbWFrZSB0 aGUgY2hhbmdlcyBhbmQgaXNzdWUgYSBuZXcNCj4gdmVyc2lvbi4gR29vZCBjYXRjaCBvbiB0aGUg UkZDIDU1NDkgaXNzdWUuDQo+ID4NCj4gPiBSZWdhcmRzLA0KPiA+DQo+ID4gLS1Kb2huDQo+ID4N Cj4gPiBPbiBEZWMgMTIsIDIwMTQsIGF0IDI6NTEgQU0sIE1hY2ggQ2hlbiA8bWFjaC5jaGVuQGh1 YXdlaS5jb20+IHdyb3RlOg0KPiA+DQo+ID4+IEhlbGxvLA0KPiA+Pg0KPiA+PiBJIGhhdmUgYmVl biBzZWxlY3RlZCBhcyB0aGUgUm91dGluZyBEaXJlY3RvcmF0ZSByZXZpZXdlciBmb3IgdGhpcyBk cmFmdC4gVGhlDQo+IFJvdXRpbmcgRGlyZWN0b3JhdGUgc2Vla3MgdG8gcmV2aWV3IGFsbCByb3V0 aW5nIG9yIHJvdXRpbmctcmVsYXRlZCBkcmFmdHMgYXMgdGhleQ0KPiBwYXNzIHRocm91Z2ggSUVU RiBsYXN0IGNhbGwgYW5kIElFU0cgcmV2aWV3LiBUaGUgcHVycG9zZSBvZiB0aGUgcmV2aWV3IGlz IHRvDQo+IHByb3ZpZGUgYXNzaXN0YW5jZSB0byB0aGUgUm91dGluZyBBRHMuIEZvciBtb3JlIGlu Zm9ybWF0aW9uIGFib3V0IHRoZSBSb3V0aW5nDQo+IERpcmVjdG9yYXRlLCBwbGVhc2Ugc2VlIOKA i2h0dHA6Ly90cmFjLnRvb2xzLmlldGYub3JnL2FyZWEvcnRnL3RyYWMvd2lraS9SdGdEaXINCj4g Pj4NCj4gPj4gQWx0aG91Z2ggdGhlc2UgY29tbWVudHMgYXJlIHByaW1hcmlseSBmb3IgdGhlIHVz ZSBvZiB0aGUgUm91dGluZyBBRHMsIGl0DQo+IHdvdWxkIGJlIGhlbHBmdWwgaWYgeW91IGNvdWxk IGNvbnNpZGVyIHRoZW0gYWxvbmcgd2l0aCBhbnkgb3RoZXIgSUVURiBMYXN0IENhbGwNCj4gY29t bWVudHMgdGhhdCB5b3UgcmVjZWl2ZSwgYW5kIHN0cml2ZSB0byByZXNvbHZlIHRoZW0gdGhyb3Vn aCBkaXNjdXNzaW9uIG9yIGJ5DQo+IHVwZGF0aW5nIHRoZSBkcmFmdC4NCj4gPj4NCj4gPj4gRG9j dW1lbnQ6IGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtaWRyLWVycm9yLWhhbmRsaW5nLTE2LnR4dA0KPiA+PiBSZXZpZXdl cjogTWFjaCBDaGVuDQo+ID4+IFJldmlldyBEYXRlOiBOb3YuIDEyLCAyMDE0DQo+ID4+IEludGVu ZGVkIFN0YXR1czogU3RhbmRhcmRzIFRyYWNrDQo+ID4+DQo+ID4+IFN1bW1hcnk6DQo+ID4+IFRo aXMgZG9jdW1lbnQgaXMgd2VsbCB3cml0dGVuIGFuZCBlYXN5IHRvIHVuZGVyc3RhbmQuIEkgZm91 bmQgc29tZSBuaXRzIGFuZA0KPiBvbmUgbWlub3IgaXNzdWUgdGhhdCBJIHRoaW5rIHNob3VsZCBi ZSByZXNvbHZlZCBiZWZvcmUgcHVibGljYXRpb24uDQo+ID4+DQo+ID4+IENvbW1lbnRzOg0KPiA+ PiBOb25lLg0KPiA+Pg0KPiA+PiBNYWpvciBJc3N1ZXM6DQo+ID4+IE5vIG1ham9yIGlzc3VlcyBm b3VuZC4NCj4gPj4NCj4gPj4gTWlub3IgSXNzdWVzOg0KPiA+PiBTZWN0aW9uIDcuMw0KPiA+PiAi VGhlIGF0dHJpYnV0ZSBpcyBjb25zaWRlcmVkIG1hbGZvcm1lZCBpZiBpdHMgbGVuZ3RoIGlzIG5v dCA0IFtSRkM0MjcxXS4iDQo+ID4+DQo+ID4+IElmIG9ubHkgYWNjb3JkaW5nIHRvIFJGQzQyNzEs IHRoaXMgaXMgdGhlIGNhc2UsIGJ1dCBzZWVtcyB0aGF0IFJGQzU1NDkgYWxsb3dzDQo+IHRoYXQg dGhlIGxlbmd0aCBvZiBOZXh0aG9wIGF0dHJpYnV0ZSBjYW4gYmUgZWl0aGVyIDQgb3IgMTYuDQo+ ID4+DQo+ID4+IE5pdHM6DQo+ID4+IFNlY3Rpb24gMi4NCj4gPj4gcy90byBoYW5kbGluZy90byBo YW5kbGUNCj4gPj4NCj4gPj4gaW4gdGhlIGxhc3QgYnVsbGV0IG9mIHRoZSA0IGFwcHJvYWNoZXMu DQo+ID4+IHMvbXVzdCBub3QvTVVTVCBOT1QNCj4gPj4NCj4gPj4gQmVzdCByZWdhcmRzLA0KPiA+ PiBNYWNoDQo+ID4+DQo+ID4NCj4gPiBfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fXw0KPiA+IElkciBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QNCj4gPiBJZHJAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4g PiBodHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL2lkcg0KDQo= From nobody Tue Dec 16 17:33:32 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDFD81A1A64; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 17:33:26 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.201 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eE4Rd4lK5DSj; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 17:33:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from usevmg20.ericsson.net (usevmg20.ericsson.net [198.24.6.45]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E9AAA1A1A5E; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 17:33:21 -0800 (PST) X-AuditID: c618062d-f79376d000000ceb-83-54908ca48b40 Received: from EUSAAHC003.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [147.117.188.81]) by usevmg20.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id A2.BE.03307.4AC80945; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 20:48:52 +0100 (CET) Received: from EUSAAMB107.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.124]) by EUSAAHC003.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.81]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 20:33:15 -0500 From: Eric Gray To: "rtg-ads@tools.ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Routing directorate review of draft-ietf-i2rs-problem-statement Thread-Index: AdASzMOVIfiS0moJSJ+SRZnsRCtD9wGqsbPQ Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 01:33:14 +0000 Message-ID: <48E1A67CB9CA044EADFEAB87D814BFF632C21B95@eusaamb107.ericsson.se> References: <09CE6C3BE5E1EA40B987BF5F25D8DDBAFDD37CBB@ENFICSMBX1.datcon.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <09CE6C3BE5E1EA40B987BF5F25D8DDBAFDD37CBB@ENFICSMBX1.datcon.co.uk> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [147.117.188.12] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFnrOLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyuXRPoO6SngkhBl9mylnMfPie0WLdjA8s Fs/nzGSxWLDmKbsDi8eSJT+ZPL5c/swWwBTFZZOSmpNZllqkb5fAldG+ayFbQYdsxf/uE4wN jCtkuhg5OSQETCS6TsxhgrDFJC7cW8/WxcjFISRwhFFiWcNxRghnOaPEu5mHmUGq2AQ0JI7d WcsIYosImEr0/b/ADlLELLCVUeLAtedACQ4OYQEPiZ4nqRA1vhIHzt9ngrCNJB6/2gPWyyKg KtE9aTM7SDkvUM2Ud0kgppCAn8TZKdkgFZwC/hLXJ39lA7EZgW77fmoN2BRmAXGJW0/mQ90s ILFkz3lmCFtU4uXjf6wQtpLEnNfXmEFGMgtoSqzfpQ/RqigxpfshO4jNKyAocXLmE5YJjGKz kEydhdAxC0nHLCQdCxhZVjFylBanluWmGxlsYgTGzDEJNt0djHteWh5iFOBgVOLh3aDfHyLE mlhWXJl7iFGag0VJnHdW7bxgIYH0xJLU7NTUgtSi+KLSnNTiQ4xMHJxSDYwG2/8wznRgXhPJ pui+eNorqR6Z3cfe8R0xN2g4msjYslP/8F7Olx9PybetU+Jl9EmqWse7ffK04Hh5+e0ikeeS Js04Ifbt9j9HfR2xM9ce1OR9XPXDuCiAcdov8Zzj7d/Et80+vn36Bm8BpskHub+o/vPoStDk epEgcfiI/PzrxX+c6zjc3GcpsRRnJBpqMRcVJwIAWq2zgXoCAAA= Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dir/9WhTKMaPTwplXdScSP1ZMPpOiK0 Cc: "rtg-dir@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-i2rs-problem-statement@tools.ietf.org" , "i2rs@ietf.org" Subject: [RTG-DIR] Routing directorate review of draft-ietf-i2rs-problem-statement X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 01:33:27 -0000 SGVsbG8sDQoNCkkgaGF2ZSBiZWVuIHNlbGVjdGVkIGFzIHRoZSBSb3V0aW5nIERpcmVjdG9yYXRl IHJldmlld2VyIGZvciB0aGlzIGRyYWZ0LiANCg0KVGhlIFJvdXRpbmcgRGlyZWN0b3JhdGUgc2Vl a3MgdG8gcmV2aWV3IGFsbCByb3V0aW5nIG9yIHJvdXRpbmctcmVsYXRlZCANCmRyYWZ0cyBhcyB0 aGV5IHBhc3MgdGhyb3VnaCBJRVRGIGxhc3QgY2FsbCBhbmQgSUVTRyByZXZpZXcsIGFuZCBzb21l dGltZXMgDQpvbiBzcGVjaWFsIHJlcXVlc3QuIA0KDQpUaGUgcHVycG9zZSBvZiB0aGUgcmV2aWV3 IGlzIHRvIHByb3ZpZGUgYXNzaXN0YW5jZSB0byB0aGUgUm91dGluZyBBRHMuIA0KDQpGb3IgbW9y ZSBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBhYm91dCB0aGUgUm91dGluZyBEaXJlY3RvcmF0ZSwgcGxlYXNlIHNlZToN Cg0KCeKAi2h0dHA6Ly90cmFjLnRvb2xzLmlldGYub3JnL2FyZWEvcnRnL3RyYWMvd2lraS9SdGdE aXINCg0KQWx0aG91Z2ggdGhlc2UgY29tbWVudHMgYXJlIHByaW1hcmlseSBmb3IgdGhlIHVzZSBv ZiB0aGUgUm91dGluZyBBRHMsIGl0IA0Kd291bGQgYmUgaGVscGZ1bCBpZiB5b3UgY291bGQgY29u c2lkZXIgdGhlbSBhbG9uZyB3aXRoIGFueSBvdGhlciBJRVRGIA0KTGFzdCBDYWxsIGNvbW1lbnRz IHRoYXQgeW91IHJlY2VpdmUsIGFuZCBzdHJpdmUgdG8gcmVzb2x2ZSB0aGVtIHRocm91Z2ggDQpk aXNjdXNzaW9uIG9yIGJ5IHVwZGF0aW5nIHRoZSBkcmFmdC4NCg0KRG9jdW1lbnQ6IGRyYWZ0LWll dGYtaTJycy1wcm9ibGVtLXN0YXRlbWVudA0KUmV2aWV3ZXI6IEVyaWMgR3JheSANClJldmlldyBE YXRlOiAxMi8xNi8yMDE0DQpJbnRlbmRlZCBTdGF0dXM6IEluZm9ybWF0aW9uYWwNCg0KU3VtbWFy eTogSSBoYXZlIHNvbWUgbWlub3IgY29uY2VybnMgYWJvdXQgdGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudCB0aGF0IEkg dGhpbmsgDQpzaG91bGQgYmUgcmVzb2x2ZWQgYmVmb3JlIGJlZm9yZSBwdWJsaWNhdGlvbi4gIFRo ZSBkb2N1bWVudCBoYXMgbml0cyANCnRoYXQgc2hvdWxkIGFsc28gYmUgY29uc2lkZXJlZCBwcmlv ciB0byBwdWJsaWNhdGlvbi4NCg0KTWlub3IgSXNzdWVzOg0KPT09PT09PT09PQ0KDQpTZWN0aW9u IDUgdGl0bGUgaXMgIkRlc2lyZWQgQXNwZWN0cyBvZiAuLi4iIGJ1dCB0aGUgZmlyc3Qgc2VudGVu Y2UgdGFsa3MgYWJvdXQNCiJyZXF1aXJlZCBhc3BlY3RzIC4uLiIgIEkgYmVsaWV2ZSB0aGF0IHRo ZSBhdXRob3JzIHNob3VsZCBiZSBjb25zaXN0ZW50Lg0KDQpUaGUgYWN0dWFsICJrZXkgYXNwZWN0 cyBuZWVkZWQiIGFyZSBhIG1peHR1cmUgb3IgcmVxdWlyZWQgYW5kIGRlc2lyZWQNCmJlaGF2aW9y cy4gIEJlY2F1c2UgdGhlIGRyYWZ0IGRvZXMgbm90IHJlZmVyIHRvIFJGQyAyMTE5IHRlcm1pbm9s b2d5LA0KaXQgaXMgbm90IGNsZWFyIGlmIHRoaXMgaXMgaW50ZW5kZWQgb3IgYSByZXN1bHQgb2Yg bmFycmF0aXZlIHN0eWxlIGNob2ljZXMuDQoNCklmIHRoZSB0ZXJtaW5vbG9neSBpcyBtZWFudCB0 byBiZSBpbnRlcnByZXRlZCBhY2NvcmRpbmcgdG8gUkZDIDIxMTksDQp0aGVuIHRoaXMgc2hvdWxk IGJlIGFkZGVkIGFzIGEgcmVmZXJlbmNlLiAgT3RoZXJ3aXNlLCBwZXJoYXBzIHRoZSB0aXRsZQ0K b2YgdGhlIHNlY3Rpb24gc2hvdWxkIGJlIGNoYW5nZWQgdG86IA0KDQogICJBc3BlY3RzIHRvIGJl IENvbnNpZGVyZWQgaW4gRGVzaWduaW5nIFByb3RvY29sIGZvciBJMlJTIg0KDQpJbiB0aGlzIHNl Y3Rpb24sIGluIGFkZGl0aW9uIHRvICJTZWN1cmUgQ29udHJvbCIgd2UgbWF5IHdhbnQgdG8gc3Vn Z2VzdA0Kc2ltaWxhciAiU2VjdXJlIEFjY2Vzcy4iICBJbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBhYm91dCByb3V0aW5n IG1heSBiZSB1c2VmdWwgdG8gYW4NCmF0dGFja2VyIGZvciBvdGhlciBmb3JtcyBvZiBhdHRhY2sg dGhhbiBkaXJlY3QgY29udHJvbC4NCg0KU2VjdGlvbiA4ICgiU2VjdXJpdHkgQ29uc2lkZXJhdGlv bnMiKSAtIE1pbmltYWxseSwgdGhpcyBzZWN0aW9uIHNob3VsZA0KcG9pbnQgdG8gc2VjdXJpdHkg YXNwZWN0cyBtZW50aW9uZWQgaW4gdGhlIHByZWNlZGluZyBzZWN0aW9uLg0KDQpOb3RlIHRoYXQg dGhpcyBzZWN0aW9uIG1lbnRpb25zICJleHRyYWN0aW9uIG9mIGRldGFpbGVkIHJvdXRlciBzdGF0 ZSINCndoaWNoIGlzIG9uZSBmb3JtIG9mIGFjY2VzcyB0aGF0IG1heSBib3RoIHJlcXVpcmUgdGhh dCByZXF1ZXN0cyANCmFyZSBhdXRoZW50aWNhdGVkIGFuZCB0aGF0IGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIG1heSBu b3QgYmUgaW50ZXJjZXB0ZWQuDQoNCk5JVFM6DQo9PT09DQoNCkluIHRoZSBJbnRyb2R1Y3Rpb24s IHNlY29uZCBsaW5lIG9mIHRoZSBmaXJzdCBwYXJhZ3JhcGgsICJXaXRoIHNjYWxlIC4uLiINCnNo b3VsZCBzdGFydCBhIG5ldyBwYXJhZ3JhcGggdG8gYmUgY29uc2lzdGVudCB3aXRoIHRoZSBuZXh0 IHBhcmFncmFwaC4NCg0KSW4gdGhlIGFwcGVuZGl4IHRoZSBmaXJzdCBwYXJhZ3JhcGggc2hvdWxk IHByb2JhYmx5IGVuZCBpbiBtdWNoIHRoZQ0Kc2FtZSB3YXkgYXMgdGhlIHNlY29uZCBwYXJhZ3Jh cGgsIGkuZS4gLSANCg0KICAgIkNMSSBTdGFuZGFyZGl6YXRpb24gaXMgbm90IGNvbnNpZGVyZWQg YXMgYSBjYW5kaWRhdGUgc29sdXRpb24gZm9yIHRoZSANCiAgICAgSTJSUy4iDQoNCkl0IGlzIG5v dCBjbGVhciB3aGF0IHdlIGFyZSB0cnlpbmcgdG8gc2F5IGluIHNheWluZyAiSTJSUyBkb2VzIG5v dCBpbnZvbHZlDQpDTEkgU3RhbmRhcmRpemF0aW9uLiINCg0KDQo= From nobody Wed Dec 17 07:05:24 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A3541A88CF; Wed, 17 Dec 2014 07:05:23 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.011 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.011 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AzX9tB8PyVdp; Wed, 17 Dec 2014 07:05:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from server.riw.us (server.riw.us [162.144.32.236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F5091A8A9A; Wed, 17 Dec 2014 07:05:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from 162-229-180-77.lightspeed.rlghnc.sbcglobal.net ([162.229.180.77]:51324 helo=RussPC) by server.riw.us with esmtpsa (UNKNOWN:DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1Y1G9r-0001lZ-MD; Wed, 17 Dec 2014 15:04:59 +0000 From: "Russ White" To: Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 10:04:58 -0500 Message-ID: <056601d01a0a$d35f2ed0$7a1d8c70$@riw.us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Thread-Index: AdAaCsGIOMLHqEcDR/CtrxFeFKgHLQ== Content-Language: en-us X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server.riw.us X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - riw.us X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server.riw.us: authenticated_id: russw@riw.us X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dir/NL1aZ51RnE6DAiNrFWbP6x9kDUk Cc: rtg-dir@ietf.org, draft-ietf-i2rs-architecture@tools.ietf.org, i2rs@ietf.org Subject: [RTG-DIR] Routing Directorate Review of draft-ietf-i2rs-architecture X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 15:05:23 -0000 Y'all -- I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft. = The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related = drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and = sometimes on special request. The purpose of the review is to provide = assistance to the Routing ADs. For more information about the Routing = Directorate, please see = =E2=80=8Bhttp://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, it = would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF = Last Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through = discussion or by updating the draft. Document: draft-ietf-i2rs-architecture-07 Reviewer: Russ White Review Date: 17 December 2014 IETF LC End Date: date-if-known=20 Intended Status: Information Summary:=20 This document is basically ready for publication, but has nits that = should be considered prior to publication. Comments: Please supply an overview of the draft quality and readability. Include anything else that you think will be helpful toward = understanding your review. Major Issues: No major issues found. Minor Issues: No minor issues found. Nits: Not much, just some possible suggestions that might (or might not) make = the draft more readable below. =3D=3D 1. Introduction =3D=3D Routers that form the internet routing infrastructure maintain state at various layers of detail and function. For example, a typical router maintains a Routing Information Base (RIB), and implements routing protocols such as OSPF, ISIS, and BGP to exchange protocol state and other information about the state of the network with other routers. This is a bit of a quibble, but... While routing protocols do = exchange "protocol state and other information about the state of the = network," The primary point of routing protocols is to exchange = reachability and topology information -- which seems to be included in = the "other information" category here. Just seems strange to put the = primary reason behind the protocols into the "other information" = category. :-) =3D=3D =20 5. Network Applications and I2RS Client In the simplest architecture, a network-oriented application has an I2RS client as a library or driver for communication with routing elements. =20 It just feels a little odd to have one named interaction type, and = two unnamed ones (?). I'm going to suggest ideas here, though it's not a = crucial point either way, since these aren't referred to anyplace else. Perhaps the "direct access architecture." =3D=3D =20 In a third architecture, a routing element or network-oriented application that uses an I2RS Client to access services on a different routing element may also contain an I2RS agent to provide services to other network-oriented applications. However, where the needed information and data models for those services differs from that of a conventional routing element, those models are, at least =20 Perhaps the "third party architecture," or some such.