From nobody Tue Jan 5 02:03:16 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 818A31B2A63; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 02:03:11 -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 Ch5aWWKSGO-z; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 02:03:08 -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 165871B2A5F; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 02:03:04 -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 CCN13528; Tue, 05 Jan 2016 10:03:02 +0000 (GMT) Received: from LHREML706-CAH.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.182) by lhreml404-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.218) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 10:03:01 +0000 Received: from NKGEML410-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.41) by lhreml706-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.182) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 10:03:00 +0000 Received: from NKGEML512-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.8.64]) by nkgeml410-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.41]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 18:02:55 +0800 From: Xuxiaohu To: Stephen Farrell , "Alvaro Retana (aretana)" , The IESG Thread-Topic: Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-bess-virtual-subnet-06: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) Thread-Index: AQHRLdaOLk8nhORYXUKrCN/X2riedp66D2jwgAAf9ICABKhN0IAAFESAgAsadwCAAAObAIABRkxQ///7zQCABQwf4P//jyyAgACaRjCAHGLKcA== Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2016 10:02:54 +0000 Message-ID: <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0CB5A07F@NKGEML512-MBS.china.huawei.com> References: <20151203142601.21348.10762.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0CB53D79@NKGEML512-MBS.china.huawei.com> <56617BAD.6070906@cs.tcd.ie> <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0CB54209@NKGEML512-MBS.china.huawei.com> <566574D9.6030202@cs.tcd.ie> <566EC84E.7070600@cs.tcd.ie> <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0CB55473@NKGEML512-MBS.china.huawei.com> <566FD680.2060901@cs.tcd.ie> <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0CB56196@NKGEML512-MBS.china.huawei.com> <5673B3C3.7020300@cs.tcd.ie> Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.111.99.55] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A0B0205.568B94D7.0082, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=169.254.8.64, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32 X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 636d13f7260e6fc54f0a0d46d7fffea7 Archived-At: Cc: "draft-ietf-bess-virtual-subnet@ietf.org" , "bess-chairs@ietf.org" , "martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com" , "bess@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [bess] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-bess-virtual-subnet-06: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2016 10:03:11 -0000 SGkgU3RlcGhlbiwNCg0KSSB3b25kZXIgd2hldGhlciB0aGUgZm9sbG93aW5nIGV4cGxhbmF0aW9u IGlzIGZpbmUgdG8geW91Lg0KDQpCZXN0IHJlZ2FyZHMsDQpYaWFvaHUNCg0KPiAtLS0tLU9yaWdp bmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0tLQ0KPiBGcm9tOiBYdXhpYW9odQ0KPiBTZW50OiBGcmlkYXksIERlY2Vt YmVyIDE4LCAyMDE1IDU6MjcgUE0NCj4gVG86ICdTdGVwaGVuIEZhcnJlbGwnOyBBbHZhcm8gUmV0 YW5hIChhcmV0YW5hKTsgVGhlIElFU0cNCj4gQ2M6IGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtYmVzcy12aXJ0dWFsLXN1 Ym5ldEBpZXRmLm9yZzsgYmVzcy1jaGFpcnNAaWV0Zi5vcmc7DQo+IG1hcnRpbi52aWdvdXJldXhA YWxjYXRlbC1sdWNlbnQuY29tOyBiZXNzQGlldGYub3JnDQo+IFN1YmplY3Q6IFJFOiBTdGVwaGVu IEZhcnJlbGwncyBEaXNjdXNzIG9uIGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtYmVzcy12aXJ0dWFsLXN1Ym5ldC0wNjog KHdpdGgNCj4gRElTQ1VTUyBhbmQgQ09NTUVOVCkNCj4gDQo+IA0KPiANCj4gPiAtLS0tLU9yaWdp bmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0tLQ0KPiA+IEZyb206IFN0ZXBoZW4gRmFycmVsbCBbbWFpbHRvOnN0ZXBo ZW4uZmFycmVsbEBjcy50Y2QuaWVdDQo+ID4gU2VudDogRnJpZGF5LCBEZWNlbWJlciAxOCwgMjAx NSAzOjIxIFBNDQo+ID4gVG86IFh1eGlhb2h1OyBBbHZhcm8gUmV0YW5hIChhcmV0YW5hKTsgVGhl IElFU0cNCj4gPiBDYzogZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1iZXNzLXZpcnR1YWwtc3VibmV0QGlldGYub3JnOyBi ZXNzLWNoYWlyc0BpZXRmLm9yZzsNCj4gPiBtYXJ0aW4udmlnb3VyZXV4QGFsY2F0ZWwtbHVjZW50 LmNvbTsgYmVzc0BpZXRmLm9yZw0KPiA+IFN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBTdGVwaGVuIEZhcnJlbGwncyBE aXNjdXNzIG9uDQo+ID4gZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1iZXNzLXZpcnR1YWwtc3VibmV0LTA2OiAod2l0aCBE SVNDVVNTIGFuZCBDT01NRU5UKQ0KPiA+DQo+ID4NCj4gPg0KPiA+IE9uIDE4LzEyLzE1IDA2OjI1 LCBYdXhpYW9odSB3cm90ZToNCj4gPiA+IEhpIFN0ZXBoZW4sDQo+ID4gPg0KPiA+ID4gU29ycnkg Zm9yIG15IGxhdGUgcmVzcG9uc2UuIFRoZSByZWFzb24gdGhhdCBJIGhlc2l0YXRlZCB0byBhZGQN Cj4gPiA+IE1BQ3NlYyBhcyBhbiBhZGRpdGlvbmFsIGV4YW1wbGUgb2YgYSBzdHJvbmcgc2VjdXJp dHkgbWVjaGFuaXNtIGlzIGFzDQo+ID4gPiBmb2xsb3dzOiBNQUNzZWMgaXMgYSBsYXllcjIgZW5j cnlwdGlvbiBtZWNoYW5pc20gYW5kIHRoZXJlZm9yZSBpdA0KPiA+ID4gc2VlbXMgbm90IG11Y2gg c3VpdGFibGUgdG8gcHJvdGVjdCBJUCBlbmNhcHN1bGF0ZWQgdHJhZmZpYyBiZXR3ZWVuDQo+ID4g PiBQRSByb3V0ZXJzLCB1bmxlc3MgdGhlc2UgUEUgcm91dGVycyBhcmUgZGlyZWN0bHkgY29ubmVj dGVkIHRvIGVhY2gNCj4gPiA+IG90aGVyIGF0IExheWVyMi4NCj4gPg0KPiA+IE15IGJlbGllZiBp cyB0aGF0IHN1Y2ggYSBzY2VuYXJpbyBjYW4gYmUgdGhlIGNhc2UgZm9yIHNvbWUgaW50ZXItREMN Cj4gPiBsaW5rcy4gVGhhdCdzIG5vdCBiYXNlZCBvbiByZWFsIGV4cGVyaWVuY2UgdGhvdWdoIHNv IEknbSBvcGVuIHRvDQo+ID4gY29ycmVjdGlvbi4gSG9wZWZ1bGx5LCBzb21lb25lIGdldHRpbmcg dGhpcyBtYWlsIGtub3dzIHRoZSBhbnN3ZXIgYW5kDQo+ID4gY2FuIHRlbGwgdXMgaWYgTUFDc2Vj IHJlYWxseSBpcyB3b3J0aCBtZW50aW9uaW5nLiAoSWYgbm90LCBJJ20gbm93DQo+ID4gY3VyaW91 cyBlbm91Z2ggdG8gdHJ5IGdvIGNoYXNlIGRvd24gdGhlDQo+ID4gYW5zd2VyOi0pDQo+ID4NCj4g DQo+IEhpIFN0ZXBoZW4sDQo+IA0KPiBUaGUgZm9sbG93aW5nIGFyZSBzb21lIG1hdGVyaWFscyBy ZWxhdGVkIHRvIE1BQ3NlYyBhbmQgTVBMUyBWUE46DQo+IA0KPiBodHRwczovL3d3dy5icm9jYWRl LmNvbS9jb250ZW50L2RhbS9jb21tb24vZG9jdW1lbnRzL2NvbnRlbnQtdHlwZXMvZg0KPiBlYXR1 cmUtZ3VpZGUvYnJvY2FkZS1tYWNzZWMtZmcucGRmDQo+IGh0dHA6Ly93d3cuanVuaXBlci5uZXQv dGVjaHB1YnMvZW5fVVMvcmVsZWFzZS1pbmRlcGVuZGVudC9uY2UvaW5mb3JtYXRpb24NCj4gLXBy b2R1Y3RzL3BhdGh3YXktcGFnZXMvbmNlL25jZS0xMzctbWFjc2VjLW92ZXItbXBscy1jY2MtY29u ZmlndXJpbmcucGRmDQo+IA0KPiBJdCBzaG93cyB0aGF0IE1BQ3NlYyBpcyBtYWlubHkgYXBwbGlj YWJsZSB0byBNUExTIEwyVlBOIHNjZW5hcmlvcyBzdWNoIGFzIFZMTA0KPiBhbmQgVlBMUyByYXRo ZXIgdGhhbiBNUExTIEwzVlBOLiAgU2luY2UgdGhpcyBkcmFmdCBpcyBiYXNlZCBvbiBNUExTIEwz VlBODQo+IChpLmUuLCBNUExTL0JHUCBJUCBWUE4pLCBpdCBzZWVtcyB0aGF0IHdlIGRvbid0IGhh dmUgdG8gbWVudGlvbiBpdCBhcyBvbmUNCj4gQURESVRJT05BTCBleGFtcGxlIG9mIGEgc3Ryb25n IHNlY3VyaXR5IG1lY2hhbmlzbS4gSXMgaXQgZmluZSBmb3IgeW91Pw0KPiANCj4gQmVzdCByZWdh cmRzLA0KPiBYaWFvaHUNCj4gDQo+ID4gPiBJZiBteSB1bmRlcnN0YW5kIGlzIHdyb25nLCB3b3Vs ZCB5b3UgcGxlYXNlIGV4cGxhaW4gaG93IHRvIHVzZQ0KPiA+ID4gTUFDc2VjIHRvIHByb3RlY3Qg dGhlIElQIGVuY2Fwc3VsYXRlZCB0cmFmZmljIGJldHdlZW4gUEUgcm91dGVycw0KPiA+ID4gd2hp Y2ggYXJlIG5vdCBkaXJlY3RseSBjb25uZWN0ZWQ/IE9yIHdvdWxkIHlvdSBwbGVhc2UgcHJvdmlk ZSBtZSBhDQo+ID4gPiBsaW5rIHRvIHNvbWUgUkZDIHdoaWNoIHRhbGtzIGFib3V0IHRoaXMgdXNh Z2U/DQo+ID4NCj4gPiBJIGRvbid0IGJlbGlldmUgdGhlcmUgaXMuIEF0IHRoYXQgcG9pbnQgeW91 IGhhdmUgdG8gZ28gdXAgdGhlIHN0YWNrIHRvDQo+ID4gTVBMUy1PUyBtYXliZSwgb3IgSVBzZWMu IEJ1dCB0aGUgdGV4dCBkb2VzIGFscmVhZHkgY292ZXIgdGhpcy4NCj4gPg0KPiA+IENoZWVycywN Cj4gPiBTLg0KPiA+DQo+ID4NCj4gPiA+DQo+ID4gPiBCZXN0IHJlZ2FyZHMsIFhpYW9odQ0KPiA+ ID4NCj4gPiA+PiAtLS0tLU9yaWdpbmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0tLSBGcm9tOiBTdGVwaGVuIEZhcnJl bGwNCj4gPiA+PiBbbWFpbHRvOnN0ZXBoZW4uZmFycmVsbEBjcy50Y2QuaWVdIFNlbnQ6IFR1ZXNk YXksIERlY2VtYmVyIDE1LCAyMDE1DQo+ID4gPj4gNTowMCBQTSBUbzogWHV4aWFvaHU7IEFsdmFy byBSZXRhbmEgKGFyZXRhbmEpOyBUaGUgSUVTRyBDYzoNCj4gPiA+PiBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLWJlc3Mt dmlydHVhbC1zdWJuZXRAaWV0Zi5vcmc7IGJlc3MtY2hhaXJzQGlldGYub3JnOw0KPiA+ID4+IG1h cnRpbi52aWdvdXJldXhAYWxjYXRlbC1sdWNlbnQuY29tOyBiZXNzQGlldGYub3JnIFN1YmplY3Q6 IFJlOg0KPiA+ID4+IFN0ZXBoZW4gRmFycmVsbCdzIERpc2N1c3Mgb24gZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1iZXNz LXZpcnR1YWwtc3VibmV0LTA2Og0KPiA+ID4+ICh3aXRoIERJU0NVU1MgYW5kIENPTU1FTlQpDQo+ ID4gPj4NCj4gPiA+Pg0KPiA+ID4+IEhpeWEsDQo+ID4gPj4NCj4gPiA+PiBPbiAxNS8xMi8xNSAw MToxOSwgWHV4aWFvaHUgd3JvdGU6DQo+ID4gPj4+IEhpIFN0ZXBoZW4sDQo+ID4gPj4+DQo+ID4g Pj4+IEl0IHNhaWQgIi4uLnVzaW5nIGEgc3Ryb25nIHNlY3VyaXR5IG1lY2hhbmlzbSBzdWNoIGFz IElQc2VjDQo+ID4gPj4+IFtSRkM0MzAxXSIuIEhlcmUgSVBzZWMgaXMganVzdCBtZW50aW9uZWQg YXMgYW4gZXhhbXBsZSBvZiBhIHN0cm9uZw0KPiA+ID4+PiBzZWN1cml0eSBtZWNoYW5pc20uIFRo ZXJlZm9yZSwgaXQgZG9lc24ndCBleGNsdWRlIE1BQ3NlYy4NCj4gPiA+Pg0KPiA+ID4+IFN1cmUs IGJ1dC4uLg0KPiA+ID4+DQo+ID4gPj4gVGhlIHRleHQgdGhhdCBJIHN1Z2dlc3RlZCBhbmQgdGhh dCB5b3Ugc2FpZCBzZWVtZWQgZ29vZCBkaWQgaW5jbHVkZQ0KPiA+ID4+IE1BQ3NlYy4NCj4gPiA+ Pg0KPiA+ID4+IE9uIDA5LzEyLzE1IDA3OjQ3LCBYdXhpYW9odSB3cm90ZToNCj4gPiA+Pj4+IFNv IG1heWJlIHNvbWV0aGluZyBtb3JlIGxpa2U6DQo+ID4gPj4+Pg0KPiA+ID4+Pj4gIkludGVyIGRh dGEtY2VudHJlIHRyYWZmaWMgb2Z0ZW4gY2FycmllcyBoaWdobHkgc2Vuc2l0aXZlDQo+ID4gPj4+ PiBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbg0KPiA+ID4+IGF0IGhpZ2hlcg0KPiA+ID4+Pj4gbGF5ZXJzIHRoYXQgaXMg bm90IGRpcmVjdGx5IHVuZGVyc3Rvb2QgKHBhcnNlZCkgd2l0aGluIGFuIGVncmVzcw0KPiA+ID4+ Pj4gb3IgaW5ncmVzcyBQRS4gRm9yIGV4YW1wbGUsIG1pZ3JhdGluZyBhIFZNDQo+ID4gPj4gd2ls bCBvZnRlbg0KPiA+ID4+Pj4gbWVhbiBtb3ZpbmcgcHJpdmF0ZSBrZXlzIGFuZCBvdGhlciBzZW5z aXRpdmUgY29uZmlndXJhdGlvbg0KPiA+ID4+IGluZm9ybWF0aW9uLiBGb3INCj4gPiA+Pj4+IHRo aXMgcmVhc29uIGludGVyIGRhdGEtY2VudHJlIHRyYWZmaWMgU0hPVUxEIGFsd2F5cyBiZSBwcm90 ZWN0ZWQNCj4gPiA+Pj4+IGZvciBib3RoIGNvbmZpZGVudGlhbGl0eSBhbmQgaW50ZWdyaXR5IHVz aW5nIGEgc3Ryb25nIHNlY3VyaXR5DQo+ID4gPj4+PiBtZWNoYW5pc20gc3VjaA0KPiA+ID4+IGFz IElQc2VjIFsxXQ0KPiA+ID4+Pj4gb3IgTUFDc2VjIFsyXSBJbiBmdXR1cmUgaXQgbWF5IGJlIGZl YXNpYmxlIHRvIHByb3RlY3QgdGhhdA0KPiA+ID4+Pj4gdHJhZmZpYw0KPiA+ID4+IHdpdGhpbiB0 aGUgTVBMUw0KPiA+ID4+Pj4gbGF5ZXIgWzNdIHRob3VnaCBhdCB0aGUgdGltZSBvZiB3cml0aW5n IHRoZSBtZWNoYW5pc20gZm9yIHRoYXQgaXMNCj4gPiA+Pj4+IG5vdA0KPiA+ID4+IHN1ZmZpY2ll bnRseQ0KPiA+ID4+Pj4gbWF0dXJlIHRvIHJlY29tbWVuZC4gRXhhY3RseSBob3cgc3VjaCBzZWN1 cml0eSBtZWNoYW5pc21zIGFyZQ0KPiA+ID4+IGRlcGxveWVkIHdpbGwNCj4gPiA+Pj4+IHZhcnkg ZnJvbSBjYXNlIHRvIGNhc2UsIHNvIHNlY3VyaW5nIHRoZSBpbnRlciBkYXRhLWNlbnRyZSB0cmFm ZmljDQo+ID4gPj4+PiBtYXkNCj4gPiA+PiBvciBtYXkgbm90DQo+ID4gPj4+PiBpbnZvbHZlIGRl cGxveWluZyBzZWN1cml0eSBtZWNoYW5pc21zIG9uIHRoZSBpbmdyZXNzL2VncmVzcyBQRXMNCj4g PiA+Pj4+IG9yDQo+ID4gPj4gZnVydGhlcg0KPiA+ID4+Pj4gImluc2lkZSIgdGhlIGRhdGEgY2Vu dHJlcyBjb25jZXJuZWQuIE5vdGUgdGhvdWdoIHRoYXQgaWYgc2VjdXJpdHkNCj4gPiA+Pj4+IGlz DQo+ID4gPj4gbm90IGRlcGxveWVkDQo+ID4gPj4+PiBvbiB0aGUgZWdyZXNzL2luZ3Jlc3MgUEVz IHRoZXJlIGlzIGEgc3Vic3RhbnRpYWwgcmlzayB0aGF0IHNvbWUNCj4gPiA+PiBzZW5zaXRpdmUg dHJhZmZpYw0KPiA+ID4+Pj4gbWF5IGJlIHNlbnQgaW4gY2xlYXIgYW5kIHRoZXJlZm9yZSBiZSB2 dWxuZXJhYmxlIHRvIHBlcnZhc2l2ZQ0KPiA+ID4+IG1vbml0b3JpbmcgWzRdIG9yDQo+ID4gPj4+ PiBvdGhlciBhdHRhY2tzLiINCj4gPiA+Pj4NCj4gPiA+Pj4gVGhhbmtzIGEgbG90IGZvciB5b3Vy IHN1Z2dlc3RlZCB0ZXh0LiBJZiBub2JvZHkgb2JqZWN0IHRoZSBhYm92ZQ0KPiA+ID4+PiB0ZXh0 LCBJIHdpbGwgYWRkIGl0IGluIHRoZSBuZXh0IHJldmlzaW9uLg0KPiA+ID4+Pg0KPiA+ID4+DQo+ ID4gPj4gQW5kIGluZGVlZCB5b3UgYWRkZWQgaXQgYWxsIGV4Y2VwdCBmb3IgTUFDc2VjLg0KPiA+ ID4+DQo+ID4gPj4gQW5kIG15IHF1ZXN0aW9uIGlzIG5vdCB3aGV0aGVyIE1BQ3NlYyBpcyBleGNs dWRlZCBidXQgcmF0aGVyIHdoeSBpdA0KPiA+ID4+IHdhcyBvbWl0dGVkLCB3aGVuIGFmYWlrLCBp dCBpcyB3aGF0IGlzIG1vc3QgdXNlZCBmb3Igc2VjdXJpbmcgdGhpcw0KPiA+ID4+IHBhcnRpY3Vs YXIga2luZCBvZiBpbnRlci1EQyB0cmFmZmljLiAoQXQgbGVhc3QgSSBiZWxpZXZlIHRoYXQNCj4g PiA+PiBNQUNzZWMgaXMgd2hhdCdzIG1vc3QgdXNlZCB0aGVyZS4gSWYgbm90LCBJJ2QgYmUgZ2xh ZCB0byBrbm93DQo+ID4gPj4gdGhhdC4pDQo+ID4gPj4NCj4gPiA+PiBTbywgd2h5IG5vdCBpbmNs dWRlIE1BQ3NlYz8gRGlkIHNvbWVvbmUgb2JqZWN0PyBJZiBzbywgd2h5PyAoQW5kDQo+ID4gPj4g Y2FuIHlvdSBzZW5kIGEgcG9pbnRlciB0byB0aGUgV0cgbGlzdCB3aGVyZSB0aGF0IG9iamVjdGlv biB3YXMNCj4gPiA+PiByYWlzZWQgc28gSSBjYW4gdW5kZXJzdGFuZCBpdCBiZXR0ZXIuKQ0KPiA+ ID4+DQo+ID4gPj4gVGhhbmtzLCBTLg0KPiA+ID4+DQo+ID4gPj4NCj4gPiA+Pj4NCj4gPiA+Pj4g QmVzdCByZWdhcmRzLCBYaWFvaHUNCj4gPiA+Pj4NCj4gPiA+Pj4+IC0tLS0tT3JpZ2luYWwgTWVz c2FnZS0tLS0tIEZyb206IFN0ZXBoZW4gRmFycmVsbA0KPiA+ID4+Pj4gW21haWx0bzpzdGVwaGVu LmZhcnJlbGxAY3MudGNkLmllXSBTZW50OiBNb25kYXksIERlY2VtYmVyIDE0LA0KPiA+ID4+Pj4g MjAxNSA5OjQ3IFBNIFRvOiBBbHZhcm8gUmV0YW5hIChhcmV0YW5hKTsgWHV4aWFvaHU7IFRoZSBJ RVNHDQo+ID4gPj4+PiBDYzogZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1iZXNzLXZpcnR1YWwtc3VibmV0QGlldGYub3Jn Ow0KPiA+ID4+Pj4gYmVzcy1jaGFpcnNAaWV0Zi5vcmc7IG1hcnRpbi52aWdvdXJldXhAYWxjYXRl bC1sdWNlbnQuY29tOw0KPiA+ID4+Pj4gYmVzc0BpZXRmLm9yZyBTdWJqZWN0OiBSZTogU3RlcGhl biBGYXJyZWxsJ3MgRGlzY3VzcyBvbg0KPiA+ID4+Pj4gZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1iZXNzLXZpcnR1YWwt c3VibmV0LTA2OiAod2l0aCBESVNDVVNTIGFuZCBDT01NRU5UKQ0KPiA+ID4+Pj4NCj4gPiA+Pj4+ DQo+ID4gPj4+PiBIaSwNCj4gPiA+Pj4+DQo+ID4gPj4+PiBDYW4gc29tZW9uZSBzYXkgd2h5IHRo ZSBtZW50aW9uIG9mIE1BQ3NlYyB3YXNuJ3QgaW5jbHVkZWQ/IEFzIEkNCj4gPiA+Pj4+IHVuZGVy c3RhbmQgaXQsIE1BQ3NlYyBpcyB3aGF0J3MgbW9zdGx5IHVzYWJsZSBmb3IgaW50ZXItREMNCj4g PiA+Pj4+IHNlY3VyaXR5IHNvIG9taXR0aW5nIGl0IHNlZW1zIGxpa2UgYSBiYWQgaWRlYSAob3Ig cGVyaGFwcyBJJ20NCj4gPiA+Pj4+IG1pc2luZm9ybWVkKQ0KPiA+ID4+Pj4NCj4gPiA+Pj4+IFRo YW5rcywgUy4NCj4gPiA+Pj4+DQo+ID4gPj4+PiBPbiAxNC8xMi8xNSAxMzozNCwgQWx2YXJvIFJl dGFuYSAoYXJldGFuYSkgd3JvdGU6DQo+ID4gPj4+Pj4gU3RlcGhlbjoNCj4gPiA+Pj4+Pg0KPiA+ ID4+Pj4+IEhpIQ0KPiA+ID4+Pj4+DQo+ID4gPj4+Pj4gWGlhb2h1IHBvc3RlZCBhbiB1cGRhdGUg dGhhdCB3ZSBob3BlIGFkZHJlc3NlcyB5b3VyIGNvbmNlcm5zLg0KPiA+ID4+Pj4+IFBlbGFzZSB0 YWtlIGEgbG9vay4NCj4gPiA+Pj4+Pg0KPiA+ID4+Pj4+DQo+ID4gPj4+Pj4gVGhhbmtzIQ0KPiA+ ID4+Pj4+DQo+ID4gPj4+Pj4gQWx2YXJvLg0KPiA+ID4+Pj4+DQo+ID4gPj4+Pj4NCg== From nobody Tue Jan 5 05:52:43 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietf.org Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3ACFC1A7013; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 05:52:41 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.11.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20160105135241.32695.97028.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2016 05:52:41 -0800 Archived-At: Cc: bess@ietf.org Subject: [bess] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bess-multicast-damping-03.txt X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2016 13:52:41 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the BGP Enabled Services Working Group of the IETF. Title : Multicast VPN state damping Authors : Thomas Morin Stephane Litkowski Keyur Patel Zhaohui Zhang Robert Kebler Jeff Haas Filename : draft-ietf-bess-multicast-damping-03.txt Pages : 15 Date : 2016-01-05 Abstract: This document describes procedures to damp multicast VPN routing state changes and control the effect of the churn due to the multicast dynamicity in customer site. The procedures described in this document are applicable to BGP-based multicast VPN and help avoid uncontrolled control plane load increase in the core routing infrastructure. New procedures are proposed inspired from BGP unicast route damping principles, but adapted to multicast. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-multicast-damping/ There's also a htmlized version available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bess-multicast-damping-03 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-bess-multicast-damping-03 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Tue Jan 5 06:49:06 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B39E1A8777 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 06:49:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.911 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.911 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 MybjM2DngP6S for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 06:48:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp-fr.alcatel-lucent.com (fr-hpida-esg-02.alcatel-lucent.com [135.245.210.21]) (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 4F6E91A8776 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 06:48:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (unknown [135.239.2.42]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id E6FADD9FEC374 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 14:48:52 +0000 (GMT) Received: from FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr711wxchhub01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.111]) by fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id u05EmiVc019932 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 15:48:55 +0100 Received: from [135.224.223.221] (135.239.27.40) by FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (135.239.2.111) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 15:48:47 +0100 Message-ID: <568BD7CE.4060609@alcatel-lucent.com> Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2016 15:48:46 +0100 From: Martin Vigoureux User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: BESS Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [135.239.27.40] Archived-At: Subject: [bess] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2016 14:49:02 -0000 Hello Working Group, This email starts a Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01 [1] which is considered mature and ready for a final working group review. Please read the document if you haven't read the most recent version yet, and send your comments to the list, no later than *12th of January*. This is not only a call for comments on the document, but also a call of support for its publication. *Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that applies to draft-ietf-bess-multicast-damping, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor of draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01 please respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. Thank you, M&T [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags/ From nobody Tue Jan 5 06:50:47 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3ED31A877B for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 06:50:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.911 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.911 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 RirxkUM1IW82 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 06:50:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp-fr.alcatel-lucent.com (fr-hpgre-esg-01.alcatel-lucent.com [135.245.210.22]) (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 8B34E1A877A for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 06:50:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (unknown [135.239.2.122]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id 0333B4CC120BB for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 14:50:40 +0000 (GMT) Received: from FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr711wxchhub01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.111]) by fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id u05EoaXu013316 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 15:50:42 +0100 Received: from [135.224.223.221] (135.239.27.40) by FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (135.239.2.111) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 15:50:41 +0100 Message-ID: <568BD840.80806@alcatel-lucent.com> Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2016 15:50:40 +0100 From: Martin Vigoureux User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: References: <568BD7CE.4060609@alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: <568BD7CE.4060609@alcatel-lucent.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [135.239.27.40] Archived-At: Subject: Re: [bess] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2016 14:50:46 -0000 Sorry, the deadline is the 19th, not the 12th. Thx -m Le 05/01/2016 15:48, Martin Vigoureux a écrit : > Hello Working Group, > > This email starts a Working Group Last Call on > draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01 [1] which is considered mature and ready > for a final working group review. > > Please read the document if you haven't read the most recent > version yet, and send your comments to the list, no later than > *12th of January*. > > This is not only a call for comments on the document, but also a call of > support for its publication. > > *Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that > applies to draft-ietf-bess-multicast-damping, to ensure that IPR has > been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, > 3669 and 5378 for more details). > > *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor of > draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01 please respond to this email and indicate > whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. > > Thank you, > M&T > > [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags/ > > _______________________________________________ > BESS mailing list > BESS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess > > From nobody Tue Jan 5 06:53:00 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 868D41A8777 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 06:52:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.194 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.194 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, 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 NPGf4GNiQ8MN for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 06:52:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from r-mail1.rd.orange.com (r-mail1.rd.orange.com [217.108.152.41]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EC391A8774 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 06:52:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from r-mail1.rd.orange.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 1A25AA44141 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 15:52:57 +0100 (CET) Received: from FTRDCH01.rd.francetelecom.fr (unknown [10.194.32.11]) by r-mail1.rd.orange.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14C5BA4411A for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 15:52:57 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.193.71.12] (10.193.71.12) by FTRDCH01.rd.francetelecom.fr (10.194.32.11) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.266.1; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 15:52:56 +0100 To: References: <568BD7CE.4060609@alcatel-lucent.com> From: Thomas Morin Organization: Orange Message-ID: <568BD8C8.3030809@orange.com> Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2016 15:52:56 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <568BD7CE.4060609@alcatel-lucent.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [bess] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2016 14:52:59 -0000 Martin, Martin Vigoureux : > *Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that > applies to draft-ietf-bess-multicast-damping, to ensure that IPR has > been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, > 3669 and 5378 for more details). > > *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor of > draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01 please respond to this email and indicate > whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. I am not aware of any such IPR. Best, -Thomas From nobody Tue Jan 5 07:06:32 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietf.org Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D5601A8798; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 07:06:30 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "\"IETF Meeting Session Request Tool\"" To: X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.11.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20160105150630.12437.97137.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2016 07:06:30 -0800 Archived-At: Cc: aretana@cisco.com, bess-chairs@ietf.org, martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com, bess@ietf.org Subject: [bess] bess - New Meeting Session Request for IETF 95 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2016 15:06:30 -0000 A new meeting session request has just been submitted by Martin Vigoureux, a Chair of the bess working group. --------------------------------------------------------- Working Group Name: BGP Enabled Services Area Name: Routing Area Session Requester: Martin Vigoureux Number of Sessions: 1 Length of Session(s): 2 Hours Number of Attendees: 120 Conflicts to Avoid: First Priority: sidr sfc pals idr rtgwg Second Priority: mpls spring pim nvo3 bier Third Priority: i2rs Special Requests: --------------------------------------------------------- From nobody Tue Jan 5 09:18:45 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 378D01A8A61 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 09:18:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] 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 U3eDOp6NBi2w for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 09:18:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from usplmg21.ericsson.net (usplmg21.ericsson.net [198.24.6.65]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB8B51A874E for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 09:18:40 -0800 (PST) X-AuditID: c6180641-f799c6d000007d66-06-568bfae26fd2 Received: from EUSAAHC002.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [147.117.188.78]) by usplmg21.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 6B.66.32102.2EAFB865; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 18:18:27 +0100 (CET) Received: from EUSAAMB109.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.126]) by EUSAAHC002.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.78]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 12:18:38 -0500 From: Jeff Tantsura To: Martin Vigoureux , BESS Thread-Topic: [bess] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01 Thread-Index: AQHRR8g9ixGzatqK602PalxvQoLwx57s+GAA Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2016 17:18:38 +0000 Message-ID: <81472276-C907-4F78-A2E6-E693329C92B1@ericsson.com> References: <568BD7CE.4060609@alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: <568BD7CE.4060609@alcatel-lucent.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/0.0.0.151217 x-originating-ip: [147.117.188.10] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <3259BBAC77F318459A92C3C79310C5AA@ericsson.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFprAIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyuXSPn+7jX91hBmufMVmsOD6T2eLOri+s Dkwerc/2snosWfKTKYApissmJTUnsyy1SN8ugSujtbuFrWAFX8Xt9lPsDYw/eLsYOTkkBEwk Np86yAZhi0lcuLceyObiEBI4wigx4XErlLOMUWLKpT5WkCo2AQOJ/9+Os4DYIgJBEuuf7QKz hQUcJVrPbWKFiDtJTNm6nR3CNpL42j4XqIaDg0VAReJZZyRImFfAXmJa8zM2kLCQgKHErfm2 IGFOoOpZ6/uZQWxGoHu+n1rDBGIzC4hL3HoynwniTgGJJXvOM0PYohIvH/8D2yoqoCtx8G4z VFxJYtLSc6wg45kFNCXW79KHGGMtcf3hC0YIW1FiSvdDdohrBCVOznzCMoFRfBaSbbMQumch 6Z6FpHsWku4FjKyrGDlKiwtyctONDDcxAuPpmASb4w7Gvb2ehxgFOBiVeHgLfnaFCbEmlhVX 5h5ilOBgVhLhfX2kO0yINyWxsiq1KD++qDQntfgQozQHi5I4b6JMY5iQQHpiSWp2ampBahFM lomDU6qB0TYnquXz0q8zGf9u3632p4FFxuyWTkb7RuWrTfECl/PMwvedOTn5mZHYhokfco+G qdytW3731V31lOCZ2Z89vBQFmIVPNKUsnpDSqe4/S0JessrDNvVZaZhdk9iEZ4Iq3tLqud3b T+7NCnCpY56a+WfvRe6TKy6o2XGesog/faHIe1dDuttEJZbijERDLeai4kQAfyM2u6MCAAA= Archived-At: Subject: Re: [bess] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2016 17:18:42 -0000 SGkgTWFydGluLA0KDQpTdXBwb3J0LCB2ZXJ5IG11Y2ggbmVlZGVkIGRvY3VtZW50Lg0KDQpDaGVl cnMsDQpKZWZmDQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCk9uIDEvNS8xNiwgMDY6NDgsICJCRVNTIG9uIGJlaGFs ZiBvZiBNYXJ0aW4gVmlnb3VyZXV4IiA8YmVzcy1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3JnIG9uIGJlaGFsZiBv ZiBtYXJ0aW4udmlnb3VyZXV4QGFsY2F0ZWwtbHVjZW50LmNvbT4gd3JvdGU6DQoNCj5IZWxsbyBX b3JraW5nIEdyb3VwLA0KPg0KPlRoaXMgZW1haWwgc3RhcnRzIGEgV29ya2luZyBHcm91cCBMYXN0 IENhbGwgb24gDQo+ZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1iZXNzLXB0YS1mbGFncy0wMSBbMV0gd2hpY2ggaXMgY29u c2lkZXJlZCBtYXR1cmUgYW5kIHJlYWR5IA0KPmZvciBhIGZpbmFsIHdvcmtpbmcgZ3JvdXAgcmV2 aWV3Lg0KPg0KPlBsZWFzZSByZWFkIHRoZSBkb2N1bWVudCBpZiB5b3UgaGF2ZW4ndCByZWFkIHRo ZSBtb3N0IHJlY2VudA0KPnZlcnNpb24geWV0LCBhbmQgc2VuZCB5b3VyIGNvbW1lbnRzIHRvIHRo ZSBsaXN0LCBubyBsYXRlciB0aGFuDQo+KjEydGggb2YgSmFudWFyeSouDQo+DQo+VGhpcyBpcyBu b3Qgb25seSBhIGNhbGwgZm9yIGNvbW1lbnRzIG9uIHRoZSBkb2N1bWVudCwgYnV0IGFsc28gYSBj YWxsIG9mIA0KPnN1cHBvcnQgZm9yIGl0cyBwdWJsaWNhdGlvbi4NCj4NCj4qQ29pbmNpZGVudGFs bHkqLCB3ZSBhcmUgYWxzbyBwb2xsaW5nIGZvciBrbm93bGVkZ2Ugb2YgYW55IElQUiB0aGF0IA0K PmFwcGxpZXMgdG8gZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1iZXNzLW11bHRpY2FzdC1kYW1waW5nLCB0byBlbnN1cmUg dGhhdCBJUFIgaGFzIA0KPmJlZW4gZGlzY2xvc2VkIGluIGNvbXBsaWFuY2Ugd2l0aCBJRVRGIElQ UiBydWxlcyAoc2VlIFJGQ3MgMzk3OSwgNDg3OSwgDQo+MzY2OSBhbmQgNTM3OCBmb3IgbW9yZSBk ZXRhaWxzKS4NCj4NCj4qSWYqIHlvdSBhcmUgbGlzdGVkIGFzIGEgZG9jdW1lbnQgYXV0aG9yIG9y IGNvbnRyaWJ1dG9yIG9mDQo+ZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1iZXNzLXB0YS1mbGFncy0wMSBwbGVhc2UgcmVz cG9uZCB0byB0aGlzIGVtYWlsIGFuZCBpbmRpY2F0ZSANCj53aGV0aGVyIG9yIG5vdCB5b3UgYXJl IGF3YXJlIG9mIGFueSByZWxldmFudCBJUFIuDQo+DQo+VGhhbmsgeW91LA0KPk0mVA0KPg0KPlsx XSBodHRwczovL2RhdGF0cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3JnL2RvYy9kcmFmdC1pZXRmLWJlc3MtcHRhLWZs YWdzLw0KPg0KPl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f DQo+QkVTUyBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QNCj5CRVNTQGlldGYub3JnDQo+aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5v cmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9iZXNzDQo= From nobody Tue Jan 5 12:25:04 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietf.org Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29C841A911B; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 12:25:03 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.11.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20160105202503.28100.48236.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2016 12:25:03 -0800 Archived-At: Cc: bess@ietf.org Subject: [bess] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bess-bgp-vpls-control-flags-00.txt X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2016 20:25:03 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the BGP Enabled Services Working Group of the IETF. Title : Updated processing of control flags for BGP VPLS Authors : Ravi Singh Kireeti Kompella Senad Palislamovic Filename : draft-ietf-bess-bgp-vpls-control-flags-00.txt Pages : 8 Date : 2016-01-05 Abstract: This document updates the meaning of the "control flags" fields inside the "layer2 info extended community" used for BGP-VPLS NLRI. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-bgp-vpls-control-flags/ There's also a htmlized version available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bess-bgp-vpls-control-flags-00 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Wed Jan 6 00:55:29 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietf.org Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B07F1ACD9A; Wed, 6 Jan 2016 00:55:28 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "\"IETF Meeting Session Request Tool\"" To: X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.11.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20160106085528.8003.97932.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2016 00:55:28 -0800 Archived-At: Cc: aretana@cisco.com, bess-chairs@ietf.org, martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com, bess@ietf.org Subject: [bess] bess - Update to a Meeting Session Request for IETF 95 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2016 08:55:28 -0000 An update to a meeting session request has just been submitted by Martin Vigoureux, a Chair of the bess working group. --------------------------------------------------------- Working Group Name: BGP Enabled Services Area Name: Routing Area Session Requester: Martin Vigoureux Number of Sessions: 1 Length of Session(s): 2 Hours Number of Attendees: 120 Conflicts to Avoid: First Priority: sidr sfc pals idr rtgwg l3sm Second Priority: mpls spring pim nvo3 bier Third Priority: i2rs Special Requests: --------------------------------------------------------- From nobody Wed Jan 6 11:04:18 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9048D1A00FA for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2016 11:04:17 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.799 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.799 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 X62847Md1xXX for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2016 11:04:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1on0752.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::752]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6B6871A00F6 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2016 11:04:15 -0800 (PST) Authentication-Results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=erosen@juniper.net; Received: from [172.28.32.102] (66.129.241.14) by BLUPR0501MB2146.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.164.23.152) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.361.13; Wed, 6 Jan 2016 19:03:55 +0000 To: Martin Vigoureux , BESS References: <568BD7CE.4060609@alcatel-lucent.com> From: Eric C Rosen Message-ID: <568D64EA.30501@juniper.net> Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2016 14:03:06 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <568BD7CE.4060609@alcatel-lucent.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------090106040704090707070706" X-Originating-IP: [66.129.241.14] X-ClientProxiedBy: BY1PR19CA0015.namprd19.prod.outlook.com (25.162.139.153) To BLUPR0501MB2146.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (25.164.23.152) X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; BLUPR0501MB2146; 2:inC6HbVWuvksIdT2NfhLoEFntcn3oL0S9eB2bjrorbim8DfsXHszMOWmA1W4QC2RDCZz0WdDN/jQd5V7UoVFrC/JvHGzKKJIoUMGCIH3WLZYjfTAUEpJIInXQjxUvTXh9rH0mGSrhyjssR5T5AM91Q==; 3:Z23QgYVEQQBKnpQzGR3OImtZx7UhTxkH35++FDgAGTkPcrDhDkoDuo6/+R1q8APhajGjgq9jGUhdTa4ZMNS943DpRE7oywG6FfH7rS+KPKGKrTtaitKeoeVRp8jtNT7q; 25:ZFzX11x4C8sWKXsXOPzvr6IShEmruG/EsQh+o3/X4DsUvS1oixbSMZQZtRfza/Shex0JNGvCb416CXkKmy9narQnPvhO5A3iEV6gfzLgMCLaJikVtPj3yEgKyQ2dp3jbgR+pg0ZPd0Od4ebc1XPLmWLpbdAw8UbQT6jdYhEDA8SXCP3iCcW/TzQ8vmc20f6rJ+rviecP6YpzsKaaq/Xz+y2GlBVNK+kfD6B87XoiMbvZsvlY7nm1Zrko8iM2Kyj1 X-Microsoft-Antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BLUPR0501MB2146; X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; BLUPR0501MB2146; 20: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; 4:HpoYY9pTHH6yQwLK0k1Gt0lE1sjKOmFeLF8WNXXxsHtR8VNJlRC/z4Am1clst5PvJWLLJHJdSute7pvVxgSF2J+rl3ePqBT/l0UgrNySqmUMCkTnKesFJd6SzNPZAhr20KcSQePDcEFsxLhbSPqnpqrfS9kzXz/AkwZYyxW6WyWD6d4HVxYNlD/y8ACYs6TyQIHa6BYcSYfsc2eBawHa4DvoZ5whyaR217ivHDP64p1EKy01ti35vHRFl3h/+b2ZkB2JS63s7i6LGSrtZPLbjFz4KFFUvu86pK2BSmNbQzvA2bj8TBuqQWRYGAHSZV7CHnX11k3WoYCPv4l0cZCi06pPQn7UJ86go9P+h4+syGXY8VOahr2ibIfTDlTD3x5jS/vcDQCQ6/6GlQztdWg0fTogfzzUro6neZRhe2PRL00= X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-Test: UriScan:(61489475475257); X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(520078)(5005006)(3002001)(10201501046); SRVR:BLUPR0501MB2146; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BLUPR0501MB2146; X-Forefront-PRVS: 0813C68E65 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6049001)(6009001)(199003)(189002)(377454003)(479174004)(24454002)(65806001)(76176999)(66066001)(189998001)(97736004)(2950100001)(586003)(3846002)(33656002)(106356001)(512944002)(50986999)(86362001)(5000100001)(270700001)(105586002)(230783001)(6116002)(65816999)(83506001)(65956001)(77096005)(92566002)(64126003)(107886002)(87976001)(101416001)(81156007)(19580405001)(5001960100002)(42186005)(84326002)(5001770100001)(40100003)(19580395003)(54356999)(1096002)(5008740100001)(122386002)(5004730100002)(36756003)(4001350100001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BLUPR0501MB2146; H:[172.28.32.102]; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; Received-SPF: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: =?Windows-1252?Q?1; BLUPR0501MB2146; 23:xSmcty5Rh00wrLwa01uK90Ty9uSU2P8j0Dh?= =?Windows-1252?Q?9pPN+SQC+7tzOyRsgrq+KWSDdpM2WHRaT/+suWsZFIK14nxStTC1J2NY?= =?Windows-1252?Q?JyxvXTWLEHdIkuLkaH+LwA1++UVFQ9Old2awM+z4W6x0CZYT011DyKjC?= =?Windows-1252?Q?TXW4Ee/Tq9yHI4oosFeBHZUU4b9M/l/Bj8W8PJdo4R4X1tbu/k6WPMsv?= =?Windows-1252?Q?zcKsLg/jdMOXTGKPWA+SuM6zBPX1BqvWbKuqv6wP83FQjYjpVJQ+YN00?= =?Windows-1252?Q?1k24VW1BE0mNa84Qa+7tABWBXBuHCzbp6GFcvkQQPAqTxaRFbVzXzHiY?= =?Windows-1252?Q?GO6fsSgaPhIcL6RQRSoPAH1kdh2g/vhbRbJyypKbcqb0L+sdPezoWpHV?= =?Windows-1252?Q?oDKHZFNROltVLk6H7iKyP3NVv/ZBy9MfBwI5aMXh33fToaDVKtOMwgJt?= =?Windows-1252?Q?QcgTdB1X4fhOL/GzXirvIVePZWo895Gz8G1OXlIRYBj6Ur0x4s7E8Y3t?= =?Windows-1252?Q?XWyk2ekIHw138foZOa42VGzdEXBrxFMTrtqi35nL81v0GSD7ymalZlhO?= =?Windows-1252?Q?KJUwhPmRGSGtg7vuWYtiT84a1t2iTxz9D2iRkhq5fvhIaC8IVjGSrdjw?= =?Windows-1252?Q?3S2izVPMsHT1HFym/LZz4kDAB1Gp+TehiM9a4Zd0i84BOs3IOMHzVDX5?= =?Windows-1252?Q?l0c95BDHllJuExiaQWErvdHO6vayFyGjHy/+dyZTo+/KsysapcPFuAko?= =?Windows-1252?Q?q7c9RTG+3Dx19hEmXTPZrM+VOzuAWGoX0CiXyLJwHi4QRgTdNh6UHbdJ?= =?Windows-1252?Q?LNr6Y12eBtpjBV8sg92SV0dQXz7pqdp7clQCw4LYdRm79UehX0DAk+ab?= =?Windows-1252?Q?plfUDwe99CXDChAFsT8P49vLfQ8jST3KfSfX7xIdYowzy4myZ48m+46W?= =?Windows-1252?Q?dZdmLAUI7DauQWcOkH41+XjuRTjkNWOjLkcLkxdtt9qsfJ8wFWABmocB?= =?Windows-1252?Q?mkvP5avWWS7Kk3I1gSU9hs29ekEFskB4yPdDd+cFcz85SdCDC7E417ol?= =?Windows-1252?Q?wN+t6GxxLiYV1Q7TMIyS1ZYEV+4vaWAwy9jyqn/LlVhvT/9ki0FvXIKq?= =?Windows-1252?Q?k04JA46M8hmdaCqsvpPHxyHOhwShykB2KTxC0KLr2lf67XfxXW2v5SHW?= =?Windows-1252?Q?IR2t4kuns6j4ll1ZnXsjNvRH+USmiK19Ch7HlxSlPQunUODiW1G2io+o?= =?Windows-1252?Q?vU9dDUU0IpwK5r6XONCdQAVynUo1s5lMFSyzCf6NVIJAzNzDcPJcwa+U?= =?Windows-1252?Q?9yNA7z+CuAW432SdMXVoIv+ZhNVvylHnJk05dkqHtqO/W71l3TnsQt9l?= =?Windows-1252?Q?E/dE4XJUm0eMGI35ciuTj9fFmRNOGB8JfxQ=3D=3D?= X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; BLUPR0501MB2146; 5:V1eOrV+6712VZqW0/uSmBaWUW9Gyz+/ayvc1tBSAkUknGLvkwQWMhIxog/pNj05K6XfrxwISat0WYNTCFBJIZYcRCTpmFDOeAoET13Ax9dTIWpKg/qde4npP0yNPn7N2Lh31+mlOWnT8UUPv9PFUyw==; 24:M3GFjwbCFDHT5EqoNdoRX6vHHQI3RQURc1Hiu99WwuqQAFMHw0x8JiUDPlOeL8Fk0THKieGS2Y7FPF7o6zFQLOFUtmHiPO7bIVdZM7AlCbs= X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Jan 2016 19:03:55.4607 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BLUPR0501MB2146 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [bess] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2016 19:04:17 -0000 --------------090106040704090707070706 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 1/5/2016 9:48 AM, Martin Vigoureux wrote: > *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor of > draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01 please respond to this email and indicate > whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. I am not aware of any relevant IPR. --------------090106040704090707070706 Content-Type: text/html; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 1/5/2016 9:48 AM, Martin Vigoureux wrote:
*If* you are listed as a document author or contributor of
draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01 please respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR.

I am not aware of any relevant IPR.

--------------090106040704090707070706-- From nobody Wed Jan 6 16:58:47 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietf.org Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DCD71A1A45; Wed, 6 Jan 2016 16:58:47 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.11.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20160107005847.26550.6243.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2016 16:58:47 -0800 Archived-At: Cc: bess@ietf.org Subject: [bess] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bess-vpls-multihoming-01.txt X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2016 00:58:47 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the BGP Enabled Services Working Group of the IETF. Title : BGP based Multi-homing in Virtual Private LAN Service Authors : Bhupesh Kothari Kireeti Kompella Wim Henderickx Florin Balus James Uttaro Senad Palislamovic Wen Lin Filename : draft-ietf-bess-vpls-multihoming-01.txt Pages : 21 Date : 2016-01-06 Abstract: Virtual Private LAN Service (VPLS) is a Layer 2 Virtual Private Network (VPN) that gives its customers the appearance that their sites are connected via a Local Area Network (LAN). It is often required for the Service Provider (SP) to give the customer redundant connectivity to some sites, often called "multi-homing". This memo shows how BGP-based multi-homing can be offered in the context of LDP and BGP VPLS solutions. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-vpls-multihoming/ There's also a htmlized version available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bess-vpls-multihoming-01 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-bess-vpls-multihoming-01 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Sun Jan 10 14:22:07 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietf.org Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45BD21A06E9; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 14:21:51 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "Stephen Farrell" To: "The IESG" X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.11.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20160110222151.13780.28800.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 14:21:51 -0800 Archived-At: Cc: draft-ietf-bess-virtual-subnet@ietf.org, bess-chairs@ietf.org, martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com, bess@ietf.org, aretana@cisco.com Subject: [bess] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-bess-virtual-subnet-07: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 22:21:51 -0000 Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-bess-virtual-subnet-07: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-virtual-subnet/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for addressing the discuss by adding more text on protection of inter-DC traffic. From nobody Sun Jan 10 14:23:36 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 107A21A070E; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 14:23:14 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.602 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.602 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-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 lJwAEgIVcwh5; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 14:23:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C9921A0856; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 14:23:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39100BE47; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 22:23:10 +0000 (GMT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PD40CtCJgIDc; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 22:23:08 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [10.87.48.91] (unknown [86.46.21.60]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 25BADBE39; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 22:23:07 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1452464587; bh=TUNcOxrysAr6HzZBgqd1aEnVW7isBO6flzsC+UelGfQ=; h=Subject:To:References:Cc:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=kHmjGK6D9g2WZdOMK4QjX86hplUw2aTnhNDCFedHTp5bU6wJ1deRWvciMAbB1ycSX pF1GvQ+f7oAeHOAK2URuL2aaOO8DyO+KC5NrzWoI0/VLv3yuUa5iQ3xmdU0sElLi8b m64zY0p73sVWUD0ZPbL4w6XyWx+pT/UjoKx2zO64= To: Xuxiaohu , "Alvaro Retana (aretana)" , The IESG References: <20151203142601.21348.10762.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0CB53D79@NKGEML512-MBS.china.huawei.com> <56617BAD.6070906@cs.tcd.ie> <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0CB54209@NKGEML512-MBS.china.huawei.com> <566574D9.6030202@cs.tcd.ie> <566EC84E.7070600@cs.tcd.ie> <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0CB55473@NKGEML512-MBS.china.huawei.com> <566FD680.2060901@cs.tcd.ie> <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0CB56196@NKGEML512-MBS.china.huawei.com> <5673B3C3.7020300@cs.tcd.ie> <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0CB5A07F@NKGEML512-MBS.china.huawei.com> From: Stephen Farrell Openpgp: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url= Message-ID: <5692D9CA.2090704@cs.tcd.ie> Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 22:23:06 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0CB5A07F@NKGEML512-MBS.china.huawei.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Cc: "draft-ietf-bess-virtual-subnet@ietf.org" , "bess-chairs@ietf.org" , "martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com" , "bess@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [bess] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-bess-virtual-subnet-06: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 22:23:14 -0000 Hiya, On 05/01/16 10:02, Xuxiaohu wrote: > Hi Stephen, > > I wonder whether the following explanation is fine to you. Sorry for the slow response. I didn't manage to find a reason to justify "forcing" mention of MACsec:-) So, I've cleared the discuss. Thanks for adding the text you have on securing inter-DC traffic, Cheers, S. > > Best regards, > Xiaohu > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Xuxiaohu >> Sent: Friday, December 18, 2015 5:27 PM >> To: 'Stephen Farrell'; Alvaro Retana (aretana); The IESG >> Cc: draft-ietf-bess-virtual-subnet@ietf.org; bess-chairs@ietf.org; >> martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com; bess@ietf.org >> Subject: RE: Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-bess-virtual-subnet-06: (with >> DISCUSS and COMMENT) >> >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Stephen Farrell [mailto:stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie] >>> Sent: Friday, December 18, 2015 3:21 PM >>> To: Xuxiaohu; Alvaro Retana (aretana); The IESG >>> Cc: draft-ietf-bess-virtual-subnet@ietf.org; bess-chairs@ietf.org; >>> martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com; bess@ietf.org >>> Subject: Re: Stephen Farrell's Discuss on >>> draft-ietf-bess-virtual-subnet-06: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) >>> >>> >>> >>> On 18/12/15 06:25, Xuxiaohu wrote: >>>> Hi Stephen, >>>> >>>> Sorry for my late response. The reason that I hesitated to add >>>> MACsec as an additional example of a strong security mechanism is as >>>> follows: MACsec is a layer2 encryption mechanism and therefore it >>>> seems not much suitable to protect IP encapsulated traffic between >>>> PE routers, unless these PE routers are directly connected to each >>>> other at Layer2. >>> >>> My belief is that such a scenario can be the case for some inter-DC >>> links. That's not based on real experience though so I'm open to >>> correction. Hopefully, someone getting this mail knows the answer and >>> can tell us if MACsec really is worth mentioning. (If not, I'm now >>> curious enough to try go chase down the >>> answer:-) >>> >> >> Hi Stephen, >> >> The following are some materials related to MACsec and MPLS VPN: >> >> https://www.brocade.com/content/dam/common/documents/content-types/f >> eature-guide/brocade-macsec-fg.pdf >> http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/release-independent/nce/information >> -products/pathway-pages/nce/nce-137-macsec-over-mpls-ccc-configuring.pdf >> >> It shows that MACsec is mainly applicable to MPLS L2VPN scenarios such as VLL >> and VPLS rather than MPLS L3VPN. Since this draft is based on MPLS L3VPN >> (i.e., MPLS/BGP IP VPN), it seems that we don't have to mention it as one >> ADDITIONAL example of a strong security mechanism. Is it fine for you? >> >> Best regards, >> Xiaohu >> >>>> If my understand is wrong, would you please explain how to use >>>> MACsec to protect the IP encapsulated traffic between PE routers >>>> which are not directly connected? Or would you please provide me a >>>> link to some RFC which talks about this usage? >>> >>> I don't believe there is. At that point you have to go up the stack to >>> MPLS-OS maybe, or IPsec. But the text does already cover this. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> S. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Best regards, Xiaohu >>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- From: Stephen Farrell >>>>> [mailto:stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie] Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2015 >>>>> 5:00 PM To: Xuxiaohu; Alvaro Retana (aretana); The IESG Cc: >>>>> draft-ietf-bess-virtual-subnet@ietf.org; bess-chairs@ietf.org; >>>>> martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com; bess@ietf.org Subject: Re: >>>>> Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-bess-virtual-subnet-06: >>>>> (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hiya, >>>>> >>>>> On 15/12/15 01:19, Xuxiaohu wrote: >>>>>> Hi Stephen, >>>>>> >>>>>> It said "...using a strong security mechanism such as IPsec >>>>>> [RFC4301]". Here IPsec is just mentioned as an example of a strong >>>>>> security mechanism. Therefore, it doesn't exclude MACsec. >>>>> >>>>> Sure, but... >>>>> >>>>> The text that I suggested and that you said seemed good did include >>>>> MACsec. >>>>> >>>>> On 09/12/15 07:47, Xuxiaohu wrote: >>>>>>> So maybe something more like: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Inter data-centre traffic often carries highly sensitive >>>>>>> information >>>>> at higher >>>>>>> layers that is not directly understood (parsed) within an egress >>>>>>> or ingress PE. For example, migrating a VM >>>>> will often >>>>>>> mean moving private keys and other sensitive configuration >>>>> information. For >>>>>>> this reason inter data-centre traffic SHOULD always be protected >>>>>>> for both confidentiality and integrity using a strong security >>>>>>> mechanism such >>>>> as IPsec [1] >>>>>>> or MACsec [2] In future it may be feasible to protect that >>>>>>> traffic >>>>> within the MPLS >>>>>>> layer [3] though at the time of writing the mechanism for that is >>>>>>> not >>>>> sufficiently >>>>>>> mature to recommend. Exactly how such security mechanisms are >>>>> deployed will >>>>>>> vary from case to case, so securing the inter data-centre traffic >>>>>>> may >>>>> or may not >>>>>>> involve deploying security mechanisms on the ingress/egress PEs >>>>>>> or >>>>> further >>>>>>> "inside" the data centres concerned. Note though that if security >>>>>>> is >>>>> not deployed >>>>>>> on the egress/ingress PEs there is a substantial risk that some >>>>> sensitive traffic >>>>>>> may be sent in clear and therefore be vulnerable to pervasive >>>>> monitoring [4] or >>>>>>> other attacks." >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks a lot for your suggested text. If nobody object the above >>>>>> text, I will add it in the next revision. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> And indeed you added it all except for MACsec. >>>>> >>>>> And my question is not whether MACsec is excluded but rather why it >>>>> was omitted, when afaik, it is what is most used for securing this >>>>> particular kind of inter-DC traffic. (At least I believe that >>>>> MACsec is what's most used there. If not, I'd be glad to know >>>>> that.) >>>>> >>>>> So, why not include MACsec? Did someone object? If so, why? (And >>>>> can you send a pointer to the WG list where that objection was >>>>> raised so I can understand it better.) >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, S. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Best regards, Xiaohu >>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- From: Stephen Farrell >>>>>>> [mailto:stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie] Sent: Monday, December 14, >>>>>>> 2015 9:47 PM To: Alvaro Retana (aretana); Xuxiaohu; The IESG >>>>>>> Cc: draft-ietf-bess-virtual-subnet@ietf.org; >>>>>>> bess-chairs@ietf.org; martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com; >>>>>>> bess@ietf.org Subject: Re: Stephen Farrell's Discuss on >>>>>>> draft-ietf-bess-virtual-subnet-06: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Can someone say why the mention of MACsec wasn't included? As I >>>>>>> understand it, MACsec is what's mostly usable for inter-DC >>>>>>> security so omitting it seems like a bad idea (or perhaps I'm >>>>>>> misinformed) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, S. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 14/12/15 13:34, Alvaro Retana (aretana) wrote: >>>>>>>> Stephen: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Xiaohu posted an update that we hope addresses your concerns. >>>>>>>> Pelase take a look. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Alvaro. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> From nobody Mon Jan 11 01:08:29 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 828FA1A8837 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 01:08:28 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.003 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.003 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-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 vLuLFn48WCEZ for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 01:08:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp-fr.alcatel-lucent.com (fr-hpida-esg-02.alcatel-lucent.com [135.245.210.21]) (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 E96521A8845 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 01:08:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (unknown [135.239.2.42]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id 8727D32397EBD; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 09:08:22 +0000 (GMT) Received: from FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr711wxchhub01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.111]) by fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id u0B989JW031819 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Mon, 11 Jan 2016 10:08:22 +0100 Received: from [135.224.210.197] (135.239.27.41) by FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (135.239.2.111) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 10:08:01 +0100 Message-ID: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 10:07:52 +0100 From: Martin Vigoureux User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [135.239.27.41] Archived-At: Cc: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election@tools.ietf.org Subject: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 09:08:28 -0000 Hello working group, This email starts a two-week poll on adopting draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 [1] as a working group item. Please state on the list if you support adoption or not (in the both cases, please also state the reasons). This poll runs until *the 25th of January*. Currently no IPR has been disclosed against this document. *Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). ==> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from each author and contributor. If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. Thank you, Martin & Thomas bess chairs [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election/ From nobody Mon Jan 11 01:09:30 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietf.org Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD4921A8849; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 01:09:28 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: IETF Secretariat To: , , X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.11.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20160111090928.31830.23108.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 01:09:28 -0800 Archived-At: Subject: [bess] The BESS WG has placed draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued" X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 09:09:28 -0000 The BESS WG has placed draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election in state Call For Adoption By WG Issued (entered by Martin Vigoureux) The document is available at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election/ From nobody Mon Jan 11 01:11:44 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FEB81A884C for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 01:11:43 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-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 eu0YL28-MNg7 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 01:11:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp-fr.alcatel-lucent.com (fr-hpida-esg-02.alcatel-lucent.com [135.245.210.21]) (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 0E6A81A8846 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 01:11:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (unknown [135.239.2.42]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id 943992B1B3F9B for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 09:11:38 +0000 (GMT) Received: from FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr711wxchhub01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.111]) by fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id u0B9Bc1G008226 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 10:11:40 +0100 Received: from [135.224.210.197] (135.239.27.40) by FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (135.239.2.111) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 10:11:40 +0100 Message-ID: <569371CA.2090704@alcatel-lucent.com> Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 10:11:38 +0100 From: Martin Vigoureux User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: References: <568BD7CE.4060609@alcatel-lucent.com> <568BD840.80806@alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: <568BD840.80806@alcatel-lucent.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [135.239.27.40] Archived-At: Subject: Re: [bess] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 09:11:43 -0000 This is a reminder Thank you Le 05/01/2016 15:50, Martin Vigoureux a écrit : > Sorry, the deadline is the 19th, not the 12th. > > Thx > -m > > Le 05/01/2016 15:48, Martin Vigoureux a écrit : >> Hello Working Group, >> >> This email starts a Working Group Last Call on >> draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01 [1] which is considered mature and ready >> for a final working group review. >> >> Please read the document if you haven't read the most recent >> version yet, and send your comments to the list, no later than >> *12th of January*. >> >> This is not only a call for comments on the document, but also a call of >> support for its publication. >> >> *Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that >> applies to draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01, to ensure that IPR has >> been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, >> 3669 and 5378 for more details). >> >> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor of >> draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01 please respond to this email and indicate >> whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. >> >> Thank you, >> M&T >> >> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> BESS mailing list >> BESS@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > BESS mailing list > BESS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess > > From nobody Mon Jan 11 04:13:36 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A8D51A8992 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 04:13:35 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-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 VCMWMmgjbWUK for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 04:13:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C609E1A8988 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 04:13:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.13] (unknown [49.149.205.178]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CB01B180137F; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 13:13:29 +0100 (CET) To: bess@ietf.org References: <568BD7CE.4060609@alcatel-lucent.com> <568BD840.80806@alcatel-lucent.com> <569371CA.2090704@alcatel-lucent.com> From: Loa Andersson Message-ID: <56939C63.9010603@pi.nu> Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 20:13:23 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <569371CA.2090704@alcatel-lucent.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Cc: Martin Vigoureux Subject: Re: [bess] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 12:13:35 -0000 Folks, For some freak reason I was (somewhat) involved in the discussion when this document was started up. I've read it several times and it is a very useful, almost "must have" type of document. The document is ready for publication! /Loa On 2016-01-11 17:11, Martin Vigoureux wrote: > This is a reminder > > Thank you > > > Le 05/01/2016 15:50, Martin Vigoureux a écrit : >> Sorry, the deadline is the 19th, not the 12th. >> >> Thx >> -m >> >> Le 05/01/2016 15:48, Martin Vigoureux a écrit : >>> Hello Working Group, >>> >>> This email starts a Working Group Last Call on >>> draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01 [1] which is considered mature and ready >>> for a final working group review. >>> >>> Please read the document if you haven't read the most recent >>> version yet, and send your comments to the list, no later than >>> *12th of January*. >>> >>> This is not only a call for comments on the document, but also a call of >>> support for its publication. >>> >>> *Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that >>> applies to draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01, to ensure that IPR has >>> been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, >>> 3669 and 5378 for more details). >>> >>> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor of >>> draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01 please respond to this email and indicate >>> whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. >>> >>> Thank you, >>> M&T >>> >>> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags/ >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> BESS mailing list >>> BESS@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> BESS mailing list >> BESS@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > BESS mailing list > BESS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess From nobody Mon Jan 11 07:13:34 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietf.org Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 127C11A024E; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 07:13:24 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: The IESG To: "IETF-Announce" X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.11.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20160111151324.9284.90376.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 07:13:24 -0800 Archived-At: Cc: draft-ietf-bess-virtual-subnet@ietf.org, The IESG , aretana@cisco.com, bess-chairs@ietf.org, martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com, bess@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [bess] Document Action: 'Virtual Subnet: A BGP/MPLS IP VPN-based Subnet Extension Solution' to Informational RFC (draft-ietf-bess-virtual-subnet-07.txt) X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 15:13:24 -0000 The IESG has approved the following document: - 'Virtual Subnet: A BGP/MPLS IP VPN-based Subnet Extension Solution' (draft-ietf-bess-virtual-subnet-07.txt) as Informational RFC This document is the product of the BGP Enabled Services Working Group. The IESG contact persons are Alvaro Retana, Alia Atlas and Deborah Brungard. A URL of this Internet Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-virtual-subnet/ Technical Summary This document describes a BGP/MPLS IP VPN-based subnet extension solution referred to as Virtual Subnet, which can be used for building Layer3 network virtualization overlays within and/or between data centers. Working Group Summary This document generated a lot of discussions within L3VPN/BESS Working Groups up to the level where it "could have been considered controversial" (Shepherd), due to the existence of certain limitations of the solution. The consensus nevertheless was in favor of the adoption, and the limitations have been described in the document. Document Quality The extension described in the document amounts to a potential set of deployment scenarios using existing technology, so it doesn't specify protocol extensions. There is at least one known deployment. Personnel Martin Vigoureux is the Document Shepherd Alvaro Retana is the Responsible AD From nobody Mon Jan 11 07:18:10 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB9A71A039A for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 07:18:08 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 nMqRfklYun66 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 07:18:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bl2on0107.outbound.protection.outlook.com [65.55.169.107]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DAEBC1A036D for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 07:18:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from BLUPR0501MB1715.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.163.120.18) by BLUPR0501MB1714.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.163.120.17) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.365.19; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 15:18:02 +0000 Received: from BLUPR0501MB1715.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.163.120.18]) by BLUPR0501MB1715.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.163.120.18]) with mapi id 15.01.0365.020; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 15:18:03 +0000 From: "Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang" To: Martin Vigoureux , "bess@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [bess] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01 Thread-Index: AQHRTFAaPwmLJIy7M06ZHginuJt5Xp72bdRA Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 15:18:02 +0000 Message-ID: References: <568BD7CE.4060609@alcatel-lucent.com> <568BD840.80806@alcatel-lucent.com> <569371CA.2090704@alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: <569371CA.2090704@alcatel-lucent.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=zzhang@juniper.net; x-originating-ip: [66.129.232.2] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BLUPR0501MB1714; 5:QcbmYvfaLwQuziojeStwv0Mqwm12kv8dm61JrjhoCT/IzGvfoZF9aZZRwAbwX4RyXCAiyQyH2K4no5hYB7UNPJ3Wsw/9iiPFvpacukkkTdqkxZ7BOLRaCqCSaJJWHFHinku26QfvsUeHQLxvOuF2kA==; 24:TtdldI7+OvuY8swrsq3zRCPn1M6Vm49fNT5wd251H/4drZ8cN4hUNCGe1tjp6gVwahBIz3daecPQ3s2T5cT1FYF/eWXAH9lrbN9t3yT009k= x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BLUPR0501MB1714; x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: ed396061-7388-4361-e64a-08d31a9a661f x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(520078)(8121501046)(5005006)(10201501046)(3002001); SRVR:BLUPR0501MB1714; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BLUPR0501MB1714; x-forefront-prvs: 0818724663 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(199003)(13464003)(377454003)(189002)(479174004)(122556002)(54356999)(2501003)(2900100001)(2950100001)(230783001)(76176999)(77096005)(5008740100001)(15975445007)(66066001)(74316001)(5004730100002)(2906002)(3846002)(10400500002)(19580405001)(101416001)(92566002)(19580395003)(33656002)(50986999)(5002640100001)(87936001)(1096002)(5001960100002)(102836003)(106116001)(99286002)(586003)(40100003)(6116002)(107886002)(76576001)(105586002)(189998001)(97736004)(106356001)(5003600100002)(5001770100001)(1220700001)(86362001)(81156007); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BLUPR0501MB1714; H:BLUPR0501MB1715.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 11 Jan 2016 15:18:02.5024 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BLUPR0501MB1714 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [bess] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 15:18:09 -0000 Support for this much needed document. Jeffrey > -----Original Message----- > From: BESS [mailto:bess-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Martin Vigoureux > Sent: Monday, January 11, 2016 4:12 AM > To: bess@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [bess] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01 >=20 > This is a reminder >=20 > Thank you >=20 >=20 > Le 05/01/2016 15:50, Martin Vigoureux a =E9crit : > > Sorry, the deadline is the 19th, not the 12th. > > > > Thx > > -m > > > > Le 05/01/2016 15:48, Martin Vigoureux a =E9crit : > >> Hello Working Group, > >> > >> This email starts a Working Group Last Call on > >> draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01 [1] which is considered mature and ready > >> for a final working group review. > >> > >> Please read the document if you haven't read the most recent > >> version yet, and send your comments to the list, no later than > >> *12th of January*. > >> > >> This is not only a call for comments on the document, but also a call > of > >> support for its publication. > >> > >> *Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that > >> applies to draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01, to ensure that IPR has > >> been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, > >> 3669 and 5378 for more details). > >> > >> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor of > >> draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01 please respond to this email and indicate > >> whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. > >> > >> Thank you, > >> M&T > >> > >> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags/ > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> BESS mailing list > >> BESS@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess > >> > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > BESS mailing list > > BESS@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess > > > > >=20 > _______________________________________________ > BESS mailing list > BESS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess From nobody Mon Jan 11 15:56:48 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 770341A877A for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 15:56:46 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-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 dXD-_3zpoMKI for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 15:56:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp-fr.alcatel-lucent.com (fr-hpgre-esg-01.alcatel-lucent.com [135.245.210.22]) (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 524E71AC439 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 15:56:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (unknown [135.239.2.122]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id 5C5A8EAA55504 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 23:56:35 +0000 (GMT) Received: from FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr711wxchhub01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.111]) by fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id u0BNudgY020305 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 00:56:39 +0100 Received: from FR711WXCHMBA03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([169.254.3.142]) by FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.239.2.111]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 00:56:39 +0100 From: "RABADAN, Jorge (Jorge)" To: "VIGOUREUX, Martin (Martin)" , BESS Thread-Topic: [bess] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01 Thread-Index: AQHRR8g+6PsuembnBE2WipgtC7BiqJ72cPoA Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 23:56:39 +0000 Message-ID: References: <568BD7CE.4060609@alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: <568BD7CE.4060609@alcatel-lucent.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/0.0.0.151217 x-originating-ip: [135.239.27.40] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <328599B11794A14A8BAEF9120A1EF551@exchange.lucent.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [bess] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 23:56:46 -0000 SSBmdWxseSBzdXBwb3J0IHRoaXMgZG9jdW1lbnQuIFZlcnkgbXVjaCBuZWVkZWQuDQoNClRoYW5r cy4NCkpvcmdlDQoNCg0KDQoNCk9uIDEvNS8xNiwgNjo0OCBBTSwgIkJFU1Mgb24gYmVoYWxmIG9m IE1hcnRpbiBWaWdvdXJldXgiIDxiZXNzLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmcgb24gYmVoYWxmIG9mIG1h cnRpbi52aWdvdXJldXhAYWxjYXRlbC1sdWNlbnQuY29tPiB3cm90ZToNCg0KPkhlbGxvIFdvcmtp bmcgR3JvdXAsDQo+DQo+VGhpcyBlbWFpbCBzdGFydHMgYSBXb3JraW5nIEdyb3VwIExhc3QgQ2Fs bCBvbiANCj5kcmFmdC1pZXRmLWJlc3MtcHRhLWZsYWdzLTAxIFsxXSB3aGljaCBpcyBjb25zaWRl cmVkIG1hdHVyZSBhbmQgcmVhZHkgDQo+Zm9yIGEgZmluYWwgd29ya2luZyBncm91cCByZXZpZXcu DQo+DQo+UGxlYXNlIHJlYWQgdGhlIGRvY3VtZW50IGlmIHlvdSBoYXZlbid0IHJlYWQgdGhlIG1v c3QgcmVjZW50DQo+dmVyc2lvbiB5ZXQsIGFuZCBzZW5kIHlvdXIgY29tbWVudHMgdG8gdGhlIGxp c3QsIG5vIGxhdGVyIHRoYW4NCj4qMTJ0aCBvZiBKYW51YXJ5Ki4NCj4NCj5UaGlzIGlzIG5vdCBv bmx5IGEgY2FsbCBmb3IgY29tbWVudHMgb24gdGhlIGRvY3VtZW50LCBidXQgYWxzbyBhIGNhbGwg b2YgDQo+c3VwcG9ydCBmb3IgaXRzIHB1YmxpY2F0aW9uLg0KPg0KPipDb2luY2lkZW50YWxseSos IHdlIGFyZSBhbHNvIHBvbGxpbmcgZm9yIGtub3dsZWRnZSBvZiBhbnkgSVBSIHRoYXQgDQo+YXBw bGllcyB0byBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLWJlc3MtbXVsdGljYXN0LWRhbXBpbmcsIHRvIGVuc3VyZSB0aGF0 IElQUiBoYXMgDQo+YmVlbiBkaXNjbG9zZWQgaW4gY29tcGxpYW5jZSB3aXRoIElFVEYgSVBSIHJ1 bGVzIChzZWUgUkZDcyAzOTc5LCA0ODc5LCANCj4zNjY5IGFuZCA1Mzc4IGZvciBtb3JlIGRldGFp bHMpLg0KPg0KPipJZiogeW91IGFyZSBsaXN0ZWQgYXMgYSBkb2N1bWVudCBhdXRob3Igb3IgY29u dHJpYnV0b3Igb2YNCj5kcmFmdC1pZXRmLWJlc3MtcHRhLWZsYWdzLTAxIHBsZWFzZSByZXNwb25k IHRvIHRoaXMgZW1haWwgYW5kIGluZGljYXRlIA0KPndoZXRoZXIgb3Igbm90IHlvdSBhcmUgYXdh cmUgb2YgYW55IHJlbGV2YW50IElQUi4NCj4NCj5UaGFuayB5b3UsDQo+TSZUDQo+DQo+WzFdIGh0 dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0Zi5vcmcvZG9jL2RyYWZ0LWlldGYtYmVzcy1wdGEtZmxhZ3Mv DQo+DQo+X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCj5C RVNTIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KPkJFU1NAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj5odHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9t YWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL2Jlc3MNCg== From nobody Mon Jan 11 16:01:53 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED8711AC43A for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 16:01:51 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-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 5uPfTm-TfW3S for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 16:01:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp-fr.alcatel-lucent.com (fr-hpgre-esg-01.alcatel-lucent.com [135.245.210.22]) (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 DDCD31A1A83 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 16:01:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (unknown [135.239.2.122]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id 061F918B60E94; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 00:01:42 +0000 (GMT) Received: from FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr711wxchhub01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.111]) by fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id u0C01ju0024121 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 12 Jan 2016 01:01:45 +0100 Received: from FR711WXCHMBA03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([169.254.3.142]) by FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.239.2.111]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 01:01:45 +0100 From: "RABADAN, Jorge (Jorge)" To: "VIGOUREUX, Martin (Martin)" , "bess@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 Thread-Index: AQHRTE+p6maq6Mx3U0Op684cagrHH572aVeA Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 00:01:45 +0000 Message-ID: References: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/0.0.0.151217 x-originating-ip: [135.239.27.40] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <0DF6A83872FF62459F918A0AB1FA359D@exchange.lucent.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 00:01:52 -0000 SSBzdXBwb3J0IHRoaXMgZG9jdW1lbnQgZm9yIFdHIGFkb3B0aW9uLg0KSXQgaXMgYW4gaW1wb3J0 YW50IG9wdGltaXphdGlvbiB0byB0aGUgUkZDNzQzMiBERiBlbGVjdGlvbiBhbmQgdGhlIGJhc2Ug Zm9yIGZ1dHVyZSB3b3JrLg0KDQoNCg0KVGhhbmtzLg0KSm9yZ2UNCg0KDQpPbiAxLzExLzE2LCAx OjA3IEFNLCAiQkVTUyBvbiBiZWhhbGYgb2YgTWFydGluIFZpZ291cmV1eCIgPGJlc3MtYm91bmNl c0BpZXRmLm9yZyBvbiBiZWhhbGYgb2YgbWFydGluLnZpZ291cmV1eEBhbGNhdGVsLWx1Y2VudC5j b20+IHdyb3RlOg0KDQo+SGVsbG8gd29ya2luZyBncm91cCwNCj4NCj5UaGlzIGVtYWlsIHN0YXJ0 cyBhIHR3by13ZWVrIHBvbGwgb24gYWRvcHRpbmcNCj5kcmFmdC1tb2hhbnR5LWJlc3MtZXZwbi1k Zi1lbGVjdGlvbi0wMiBbMV0gYXMgYSB3b3JraW5nIGdyb3VwIGl0ZW0uDQo+DQo+UGxlYXNlIHN0 YXRlIG9uIHRoZSBsaXN0IGlmIHlvdSBzdXBwb3J0IGFkb3B0aW9uIG9yIG5vdCAoaW4gdGhlIGJv dGggDQo+Y2FzZXMsIHBsZWFzZSBhbHNvIHN0YXRlIHRoZSByZWFzb25zKS4NCj4NCj5UaGlzIHBv bGwgcnVucyB1bnRpbCAqdGhlIDI1dGggb2YgSmFudWFyeSouDQo+DQo+Q3VycmVudGx5IG5vIElQ UiBoYXMgYmVlbiBkaXNjbG9zZWQgYWdhaW5zdCB0aGlzIGRvY3VtZW50Lg0KPg0KPipDb2luY2lk ZW50YWxseSosIHdlIGFyZSBhbHNvIHBvbGxpbmcgZm9yIGtub3dsZWRnZSBvZiBhbnkgSVBSIHRo YXQNCj5hcHBsaWVzIHRvIHRoaXMgZHJhZnQsIHRvIGVuc3VyZSB0aGF0IElQUiBoYXMgYmVlbiBk aXNjbG9zZWQgaW4NCj5jb21wbGlhbmNlIHdpdGggSUVURiBJUFIgcnVsZXMgKHNlZSBSRkNzIDM5 NzksIDQ4NzksIDM2NjkNCj5hbmQgNTM3OCBmb3IgbW9yZSBkZXRhaWxzKS4NCj4NCj49PT4gKklm KiB5b3UgYXJlIGxpc3RlZCBhcyBhIGRvY3VtZW50IGF1dGhvciBvciBjb250cmlidXRvciBwbGVh c2UNCj5yZXNwb25kIHRvIHRoaXMgZW1haWwgYW5kIGluZGljYXRlIHdoZXRoZXIgb3Igbm90IHlv dSBhcmUgYXdhcmUgb2YgYW55IA0KPnJlbGV2YW50IElQUi4NCj4NCj5UaGUgZHJhZnQgd2lsbCBu b3QgYmUgYWRvcHRlZCB1bnRpbCBhIHJlc3BvbnNlIGhhcyBiZWVuIHJlY2VpdmVkIGZyb20NCj5l YWNoIGF1dGhvciBhbmQgY29udHJpYnV0b3IuDQo+DQo+SWYgeW91IGFyZSBub3QgbGlzdGVkIGFz IGFuIGF1dGhvciBvciBjb250cmlidXRvciwgdGhlbiBwbGVhc2UgDQo+ZXhwbGljaXRseSByZXNw b25kIG9ubHkgaWYgeW91IGFyZSBhd2FyZSBvZiBhbnkgSVBSIHRoYXQgaGFzIG5vdCB5ZXQgDQo+ YmVlbiBkaXNjbG9zZWQgaW4gY29uZm9ybWFuY2Ugd2l0aCBJRVRGIHJ1bGVzLg0KPg0KPlRoYW5r IHlvdSwNCj4NCj5NYXJ0aW4gJiBUaG9tYXMNCj5iZXNzIGNoYWlycw0KPg0KPlsxXSBodHRwczov L2RhdGF0cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3JnL2RvYy9kcmFmdC1tb2hhbnR5LWJlc3MtZXZwbi1kZi1lbGVj dGlvbi8NCj4NCj5fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f Xw0KPkJFU1MgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQo+QkVTU0BpZXRmLm9yZw0KPmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYu b3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vYmVzcw0K From nobody Mon Jan 11 22:15:54 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 584241ACE62 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 22:15:53 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] 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 BrcJoggcvxkO for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 22:15:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from usplmg21.ericsson.net (usplmg21.ericsson.net [198.24.6.65]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BEB421ACE5D for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 22:15:51 -0800 (PST) X-AuditID: c6180641-f799c6d000007d66-e8-56949a085cb6 Received: from EUSAAHC007.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [147.117.188.93]) by usplmg21.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 1E.07.32102.80A94965; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 07:15:36 +0100 (CET) Received: from EUSAAMB103.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.120]) by EUSAAHC007.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.93]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 01:15:50 -0500 From: Antoni Przygienda To: "RABADAN, Jorge (Jorge)" , "VIGOUREUX, Martin (Martin)" , "bess@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 Thread-Index: AQHRTE+mGpfmzZDcHUSNx/Nnj7Op6573VAuAgAAUqjA= Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 06:15:49 +0000 Message-ID: <2E4BB27CAB87BF43B4207C0E55860F180EB5A7FE@eusaamb103.ericsson.se> References: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: 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="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFupikeLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42KZXLonVpdj1pQwgxnX9CxWHJ/JbHFz0zRW i2+XlrBY3Nn1hdWBxaP12V5WjyVLfjJ5fLn8mS2AOYrLJiU1J7MstUjfLoEro7X7LmvBdeGK Da+nMzUwdgh0MXJySAiYSGxctZkRwhaTuHBvPVsXIxeHkMARRolHnyaxQjjLGSVePNzPClLF JmAhcfnbU2aQhIjACkaJSx9PgiWYBfIlvl9eDzZKWMBX4nHXKWYQW0QgQGLrtEWsELaVxKpn Z9hBbBYBVYkDW98ArePg4AWqn9ksBRIWEsiV2DThMhNImFPATeLfOjWQMCPQcd9PrWGC2CQu cevJfCaIowUkluw5zwxhi0q8fPyPFcJWkpjz+hozRL2OxILdn9ggbG2JZQtfg8V5BQQlTs58 wjKBUWwWkrGzkLTMQtIyC0nLAkaWVYwcpcUFObnpRoabGIExdEyCzXEH495ez0OMAhyMSjy8 H4ynhAmxJpYVV+YeYpTgYFYS4XUKAgrxpiRWVqUW5ccXleakFh9ilOZgURLnTZRpDBMSSE8s Sc1OTS1ILYLJMnFwSjUwikZxrn7zbc1kJXFGpojn0e8+dZYFhe/iTHghLbBq5p2vvv8TuLSb 9CbcVt3/UfV7ieHsCTfvbzjp9u3C3CMz7cNfWynE7nbgKT0t/JSPVdW75CibjKq+S3z/QQWe 3FULyg5IrHkt+bDTRlMnxCHp3AonlrBXst0uHpPWyMs+fy86/fTmHp1qJZbijERDLeai4kQA AWR9h50CAAA= Archived-At: Cc: "draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 06:15:53 -0000 Support as co-author thanks=20 --- tony _____________________________________________ "Simple, clear purpose and principles give rise to complex and intelligent = behavior. Complex rules and regulations give rise to simple and stupid beha= vior."=20 --- Dee Hock=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: BESS [mailto:bess-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of RABADAN, Jorge > (Jorge) > Sent: Monday, January 11, 2016 4:02 PM > To: VIGOUREUX, Martin (Martin); bess@ietf.org > Cc: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election@tools.ietf.org > Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-electio= n-02 >=20 > I support this document for WG adoption. > It is an important optimization to the RFC7432 DF election and the base f= or > future work. >=20 >=20 >=20 > Thanks. > Jorge >=20 >=20 > On 1/11/16, 1:07 AM, "BESS on behalf of Martin Vigoureux" bounces@ietf.org on behalf of martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com> wrote: >=20 > >Hello working group, > > > >This email starts a two-week poll on adopting > >draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 [1] as a working group item. > > > >Please state on the list if you support adoption or not (in the both > >cases, please also state the reasons). > > > >This poll runs until *the 25th of January*. > > > >Currently no IPR has been disclosed against this document. > > > >*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that > >applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in > >compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for > >more details). > > > >=3D=3D> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please > >respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any > >relevant IPR. > > > >The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from > >each author and contributor. > > > >If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please > >explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet > >been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. > > > >Thank you, > > > >Martin & Thomas > >bess chairs > > > >[1] > >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election/ > > > >_______________________________________________ > >BESS mailing list > >BESS@ietf.org > >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess > _______________________________________________ > BESS mailing list > BESS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess From nobody Mon Jan 11 22:54:37 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C1361A004D for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 22:54:34 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] 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 Kxxz5MB9M9hx for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 22:54:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from usplmg20.ericsson.net (usplmg20.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 9CB491A0047 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 22:54:32 -0800 (PST) X-AuditID: c618062d-f79d16d000001b1c-b4-5694a114ebe9 Received: from EUSAAHC008.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [147.117.188.96]) by usplmg20.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 46.5D.06940.411A4965; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 07:45:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from EUSAAMB109.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.126]) by EUSAAHC008.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.96]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 01:54:31 -0500 From: Jeff Tantsura To: Martin Vigoureux , "bess@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 Thread-Index: AQHRTE+nQSTIZRSBv0Cu3o+M+Li5bZ73QVGA Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 06:54:29 +0000 Message-ID: <437EFB8B-C0C7-400D-A0F4-2F0BFBC047BF@ericsson.com> References: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/0.0.0.151217 x-originating-ip: [147.117.188.12] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <6E68CA065CC7D749B3BDB4540F60C699@ericsson.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFlrGIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyuXRPgq7IwilhBk/2SFusOD6T2eLmpmms Fnd2fWF1YPZofbaX1WPJkp9MHl8uf2YLYI7isklJzcksSy3St0vgyjh43aJgkkDF+zfz2RoY 7/B3MXJySAiYSHS1PWaDsMUkLtxbD2RzcQgJHGGUWL54DTuEs5xRYsPkRrAqNgEDif/fjrN0 MXJwiAjESvxqDwMJMwvkS3y/vJ4RxBYW8JWY1juJBcQWEQiQ2DptESuEbSRxYM9DJhCbRUBV ounQZrAaXgF7if6J78DGCwkYSizf8g6shhOkfl4PM4jNCHTc91NrmCB2iUvcejKfCeJoAYkl e84zQ9iiEi8f/wPbJSqgK3HwbjNUXElizutrzCAnMwtoSqzfpQ8xxlqi8+sSVghbUWJK90N2 iHMEJU7OfMIygVFiFpJtsxC6ZyHpnoWkexaS7gWMrKsYOUqLC3Jy040MNjECY++YBJvuDsb7 0z0PMQpwMCrx8H4wnhImxJpYVlyZe4hRgoNZSYTXKQgoxJuSWFmVWpQfX1Sak1p8iFGag0VJ nFdQujFMSCA9sSQ1OzW1ILUIJsvEwSnVwNhjFqZpFmO+Oiwu5EdmwclKKfnAY4trmpXkt+1r eJj5dU38jrcc4bcu/c25o7bg47x38V/r07s5st9MqD5Reboj/PuERcErWOVt8/u1Gb+3rw1h r+7b0XhzCvtKZ47brx5/CTjnwc09PSE+q/ZVZylv8qqPC7+zG0eLnlRf8+1V+Dx7zruOAUos xRmJhlrMRcWJAM0FLoa5AgAA Archived-At: Cc: "draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 06:54:34 -0000 WWVzL3N1cHBvcnQuDQoNCkNoZWVycywNCkplZmYNCg0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KT24gMS8xMS8xNiwg MDE6MDcsICJCRVNTIG9uIGJlaGFsZiBvZiBNYXJ0aW4gVmlnb3VyZXV4IiA8YmVzcy1ib3VuY2Vz QGlldGYub3JnIG9uIGJlaGFsZiBvZiBtYXJ0aW4udmlnb3VyZXV4QGFsY2F0ZWwtbHVjZW50LmNv bT4gd3JvdGU6DQoNCj5IZWxsbyB3b3JraW5nIGdyb3VwLA0KPg0KPlRoaXMgZW1haWwgc3RhcnRz IGEgdHdvLXdlZWsgcG9sbCBvbiBhZG9wdGluZw0KPmRyYWZ0LW1vaGFudHktYmVzcy1ldnBuLWRm LWVsZWN0aW9uLTAyIFsxXSBhcyBhIHdvcmtpbmcgZ3JvdXAgaXRlbS4NCj4NCj5QbGVhc2Ugc3Rh dGUgb24gdGhlIGxpc3QgaWYgeW91IHN1cHBvcnQgYWRvcHRpb24gb3Igbm90IChpbiB0aGUgYm90 aCANCj5jYXNlcywgcGxlYXNlIGFsc28gc3RhdGUgdGhlIHJlYXNvbnMpLg0KPg0KPlRoaXMgcG9s bCBydW5zIHVudGlsICp0aGUgMjV0aCBvZiBKYW51YXJ5Ki4NCj4NCj5DdXJyZW50bHkgbm8gSVBS IGhhcyBiZWVuIGRpc2Nsb3NlZCBhZ2FpbnN0IHRoaXMgZG9jdW1lbnQuDQo+DQo+KkNvaW5jaWRl bnRhbGx5Kiwgd2UgYXJlIGFsc28gcG9sbGluZyBmb3Iga25vd2xlZGdlIG9mIGFueSBJUFIgdGhh dA0KPmFwcGxpZXMgdG8gdGhpcyBkcmFmdCwgdG8gZW5zdXJlIHRoYXQgSVBSIGhhcyBiZWVuIGRp c2Nsb3NlZCBpbg0KPmNvbXBsaWFuY2Ugd2l0aCBJRVRGIElQUiBydWxlcyAoc2VlIFJGQ3MgMzk3 OSwgNDg3OSwgMzY2OQ0KPmFuZCA1Mzc4IGZvciBtb3JlIGRldGFpbHMpLg0KPg0KPj09PiAqSWYq IHlvdSBhcmUgbGlzdGVkIGFzIGEgZG9jdW1lbnQgYXV0aG9yIG9yIGNvbnRyaWJ1dG9yIHBsZWFz ZQ0KPnJlc3BvbmQgdG8gdGhpcyBlbWFpbCBhbmQgaW5kaWNhdGUgd2hldGhlciBvciBub3QgeW91 IGFyZSBhd2FyZSBvZiBhbnkgDQo+cmVsZXZhbnQgSVBSLg0KPg0KPlRoZSBkcmFmdCB3aWxsIG5v dCBiZSBhZG9wdGVkIHVudGlsIGEgcmVzcG9uc2UgaGFzIGJlZW4gcmVjZWl2ZWQgZnJvbQ0KPmVh Y2ggYXV0aG9yIGFuZCBjb250cmlidXRvci4NCj4NCj5JZiB5b3UgYXJlIG5vdCBsaXN0ZWQgYXMg YW4gYXV0aG9yIG9yIGNvbnRyaWJ1dG9yLCB0aGVuIHBsZWFzZSANCj5leHBsaWNpdGx5IHJlc3Bv bmQgb25seSBpZiB5b3UgYXJlIGF3YXJlIG9mIGFueSBJUFIgdGhhdCBoYXMgbm90IHlldCANCj5i ZWVuIGRpc2Nsb3NlZCBpbiBjb25mb3JtYW5jZSB3aXRoIElFVEYgcnVsZXMuDQo+DQo+VGhhbmsg eW91LA0KPg0KPk1hcnRpbiAmIFRob21hcw0KPmJlc3MgY2hhaXJzDQo+DQo+WzFdIGh0dHBzOi8v ZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0Zi5vcmcvZG9jL2RyYWZ0LW1vaGFudHktYmVzcy1ldnBuLWRmLWVsZWN0 aW9uLw0KPg0KPl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f DQo+QkVTUyBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QNCj5CRVNTQGlldGYub3JnDQo+aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5v cmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9iZXNzDQo= From nobody Mon Jan 11 23:53:43 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4197D1A047A for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 23:53:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.502 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.502 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, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 9u5tkLUXecRT for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 23:53:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from alln-iport-2.cisco.com (alln-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.142.89]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ABF831A046D for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 23:53:40 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1513; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1452585220; x=1453794820; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=eVvd+zrQDo2esdqbFmOl9e00zFsJa49KqvDWYLg2nxk=; b=ZVtnVgy6Jrxeahtpla5vL+7Ftxcv0da/wa4aRL81t/R5Qag/z3FykGlC 9mC2E5jseuhpQwOIB0Ddf4jBjg0zXTPoBRNf4AW8VS4bnKLyNIEGjpzG7 9ZPG6a8GjS0OOVauVzHT6HQhknI2tbR+Q2gGc4eJYpFaPfwj/+ACIeflp U=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0AYAgAysJRW/4QNJK1egzpSbQaIU7MuA?= =?us-ascii?q?Q2BZhgKhW0CgSc4FAEBAQEBAQGBCoQ1AQEEAQEBawsQAgEIRicLJQIEAQ0FiC4?= =?us-ascii?q?Ov0oBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEUBIZWhH+EJhEBhQUBBJcTAYVCiBaBX?= =?us-ascii?q?oRDiFuOUQEgAQFChApyhG86gQgBAQE?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,556,1444694400"; d="scan'208";a="224988316" Received: from alln-core-10.cisco.com ([173.36.13.132]) by alln-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 12 Jan 2016 07:53:39 +0000 Received: from XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com (xch-rtp-015.cisco.com [64.101.220.155]) by alln-core-10.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u0C7rdk0002361 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 12 Jan 2016 07:53:39 GMT Received: from xch-rtp-012.cisco.com (64.101.220.152) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 02:53:38 -0500 Received: from xch-rtp-012.cisco.com ([64.101.220.152]) by XCH-RTP-012.cisco.com ([64.101.220.152]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 02:53:38 -0500 From: "Satya Mohanty (satyamoh)" To: Martin Vigoureux , "bess@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 Thread-Index: AQHRTE+oMANq2h3B1UWRrEvV7UJlLp73UcQA Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 07:53:38 +0000 Message-ID: References: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.24.0.121] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 07:53:42 -0000 Support as co-author. Thanks, =8BSatya On 1/11/16, 1:07 AM, "BESS on behalf of Martin Vigoureux" wrote: >Hello working group, > >This email starts a two-week poll on adopting >draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 [1] as a working group item. > >Please state on the list if you support adoption or not (in the both >cases, please also state the reasons). > >This poll runs until *the 25th of January*. > >Currently no IPR has been disclosed against this document. > >*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that >applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in >compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 >and 5378 for more details). > >=3D=3D> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please >respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any >relevant IPR. > >The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from >each author and contributor. > >If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please >explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet >been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. > >Thank you, > >Martin & Thomas >bess chairs > >[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election/ > >_______________________________________________ >BESS mailing list >BESS@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess From nobody Tue Jan 12 01:20:07 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC3241A6F57 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 01:19:57 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.502 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.502 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, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 nvHkTXg6LXWB for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 01:19:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.86.73]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 34BF31A6F51 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 01:19:55 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2312; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1452590395; x=1453799995; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=6sXASXjPyCET85e9psrPz0KEvL0YL8mC/isHv99RERI=; b=OzQt4xqAIa8HOffzREqSj9wd0KWSN8v4TfxYz0mA0wuNXuy5j8nCn9sI 17yXzBF3EyyR26E2XxACSv8vdfJTxh0Z3mqtrgiElpo9wn6P20OErbaLb PnMpD2jc2HCSLF9H/wnvx1o13y7AObUEViLhWrX/AcQN7PIf5p7k9TKEq M=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0D7AQDPxJRW/5xdJa1egzpSbQaIU7MvA?= =?us-ascii?q?Q2BZhgKhW0CHIENOBQBAQEBAQEBgQqENQEBBAEBASAROgsQAgEIGgImAgICJQs?= =?us-ascii?q?VEAIEAQ0FiC4OrzaQKQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARQEgQGFVYR/hCYRA?= =?us-ascii?q?R0YgweBSQWXEwGFQogWgV6EQ4hbjlIBIAEBQoQKcoRvOoEIAQEB?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,556,1444694400"; d="scan'208";a="65435341" Received: from rcdn-core-5.cisco.com ([173.37.93.156]) by rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 12 Jan 2016 09:19:54 +0000 Received: from XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com (xch-rtp-013.cisco.com [64.101.220.153]) by rcdn-core-5.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u0C9JsXn013975 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 12 Jan 2016 09:19:54 GMT Received: from xch-rtp-017.cisco.com (64.101.220.157) by XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com (64.101.220.153) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 04:19:53 -0500 Received: from xch-rtp-017.cisco.com ([64.101.220.157]) by XCH-RTP-017.cisco.com ([64.101.220.157]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 04:19:53 -0500 From: "Keyur Patel (keyupate)" To: "Satya Mohanty (satyamoh)" , Martin Vigoureux , "bess@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 Thread-Index: AQHRTE+scgVMqx727E+HEhg3VHSowZ731+MAgAAo2IA= Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 09:19:53 +0000 Message-ID: References: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.4.9.150325 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.228.42.211] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <84AFA059008FC84083968A6F1EDB91F4@emea.cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 09:19:57 -0000 U3VwcG9ydCBhcyBhIGNvLWF1dGhvci4NCg0KUmVnYXJkcywNCktleXVyDQoNCk9uIDEvMTIvMTYs IDg6NTMgQU0sICJTYXR5YSBNb2hhbnR5IChzYXR5YW1vaCkiIDxzYXR5YW1vaEBjaXNjby5jb20+ IHdyb3RlOg0KDQo+U3VwcG9ydCBhcyBjby1hdXRob3IuDQo+DQo+VGhhbmtzLA0KPuKAuVNhdHlh DQo+DQo+T24gMS8xMS8xNiwgMTowNyBBTSwgIkJFU1Mgb24gYmVoYWxmIG9mIE1hcnRpbiBWaWdv dXJldXgiDQo+PGJlc3MtYm91bmNlc0BpZXRmLm9yZyBvbiBiZWhhbGYgb2YgbWFydGluLnZpZ291 cmV1eEBhbGNhdGVsLWx1Y2VudC5jb20+DQo+d3JvdGU6DQo+DQo+PkhlbGxvIHdvcmtpbmcgZ3Jv dXAsDQo+Pg0KPj5UaGlzIGVtYWlsIHN0YXJ0cyBhIHR3by13ZWVrIHBvbGwgb24gYWRvcHRpbmcN Cj4+ZHJhZnQtbW9oYW50eS1iZXNzLWV2cG4tZGYtZWxlY3Rpb24tMDIgWzFdIGFzIGEgd29ya2lu ZyBncm91cCBpdGVtLg0KPj4NCj4+UGxlYXNlIHN0YXRlIG9uIHRoZSBsaXN0IGlmIHlvdSBzdXBw b3J0IGFkb3B0aW9uIG9yIG5vdCAoaW4gdGhlIGJvdGgNCj4+Y2FzZXMsIHBsZWFzZSBhbHNvIHN0 YXRlIHRoZSByZWFzb25zKS4NCj4+DQo+PlRoaXMgcG9sbCBydW5zIHVudGlsICp0aGUgMjV0aCBv ZiBKYW51YXJ5Ki4NCj4+DQo+PkN1cnJlbnRseSBubyBJUFIgaGFzIGJlZW4gZGlzY2xvc2VkIGFn YWluc3QgdGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudC4NCj4+DQo+PipDb2luY2lkZW50YWxseSosIHdlIGFyZSBhbHNv IHBvbGxpbmcgZm9yIGtub3dsZWRnZSBvZiBhbnkgSVBSIHRoYXQNCj4+YXBwbGllcyB0byB0aGlz IGRyYWZ0LCB0byBlbnN1cmUgdGhhdCBJUFIgaGFzIGJlZW4gZGlzY2xvc2VkIGluDQo+PmNvbXBs aWFuY2Ugd2l0aCBJRVRGIElQUiBydWxlcyAoc2VlIFJGQ3MgMzk3OSwgNDg3OSwgMzY2OQ0KPj5h bmQgNTM3OCBmb3IgbW9yZSBkZXRhaWxzKS4NCj4+DQo+Pj09PiAqSWYqIHlvdSBhcmUgbGlzdGVk IGFzIGEgZG9jdW1lbnQgYXV0aG9yIG9yIGNvbnRyaWJ1dG9yIHBsZWFzZQ0KPj5yZXNwb25kIHRv IHRoaXMgZW1haWwgYW5kIGluZGljYXRlIHdoZXRoZXIgb3Igbm90IHlvdSBhcmUgYXdhcmUgb2Yg YW55DQo+PnJlbGV2YW50IElQUi4NCj4+DQo+PlRoZSBkcmFmdCB3aWxsIG5vdCBiZSBhZG9wdGVk IHVudGlsIGEgcmVzcG9uc2UgaGFzIGJlZW4gcmVjZWl2ZWQgZnJvbQ0KPj5lYWNoIGF1dGhvciBh bmQgY29udHJpYnV0b3IuDQo+Pg0KPj5JZiB5b3UgYXJlIG5vdCBsaXN0ZWQgYXMgYW4gYXV0aG9y IG9yIGNvbnRyaWJ1dG9yLCB0aGVuIHBsZWFzZQ0KPj5leHBsaWNpdGx5IHJlc3BvbmQgb25seSBp ZiB5b3UgYXJlIGF3YXJlIG9mIGFueSBJUFIgdGhhdCBoYXMgbm90IHlldA0KPj5iZWVuIGRpc2Ns b3NlZCBpbiBjb25mb3JtYW5jZSB3aXRoIElFVEYgcnVsZXMuDQo+Pg0KPj5UaGFuayB5b3UsDQo+ Pg0KPj5NYXJ0aW4gJiBUaG9tYXMNCj4+YmVzcyBjaGFpcnMNCj4+DQo+PlsxXSBodHRwczovL2Rh dGF0cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3JnL2RvYy9kcmFmdC1tb2hhbnR5LWJlc3MtZXZwbi1kZi1lbGVjdGlv bi8NCj4+DQo+Pl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f DQo+PkJFU1MgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQo+PkJFU1NAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4+aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0 Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9iZXNzDQo+DQoNCg== From nobody Tue Jan 12 05:23:48 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C2361AD1EE for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 05:23:47 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 p9bo7KLfW2WP for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 05:23:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2on0133.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.100.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8F5321AD244 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 05:23:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from SN1PR0501MB1709.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.163.130.155) by SN1PR0501MB1712.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.163.130.158) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.361.13; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 13:23:42 +0000 Received: from SN1PR0501MB1709.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.163.130.155]) by SN1PR0501MB1709.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.163.130.155]) with mapi id 15.01.0361.006; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 13:23:42 +0000 From: John E Drake To: Martin Vigoureux , "bess@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 Thread-Index: AQHRTE+xZPU3B6YxDUW1UfvnELSNYZ734BBQ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 13:23:42 +0000 Message-ID: References: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=jdrake@juniper.net; x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.14] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; SN1PR0501MB1712; 5:4Zys6R0s/HLe0mtkRPT+xsIW5B5dRQ8IatSVH7KWY8Is2EPFatkI84ZYyhx058CXceLWeKIuaCpVoi1mtyXJYsMkWcVA0yGT+YmbhZiSraLfSX4INinjsoh04GIyjhAf5vtQW6qqWrFZKlfoPUhFQQ==; 24:IQ61nSM6PAhbtME3mndJYpxbLDyDg/OvCdFiA+WmzU8SKWsr+f+WzKADkNkPlGifJPIaGFb7OfJpPjp6UluPDvaT+XUFY4yux2rglhq8qhE= x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:SN1PR0501MB1712; x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: a4e09740-b8f0-4022-6aec-08d31b539731 x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(520078)(8121501046)(3002001)(10201501046); SRVR:SN1PR0501MB1712; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:SN1PR0501MB1712; x-forefront-prvs: 081904387B x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(189002)(199003)(377454003)(13464003)(97736004)(99286002)(586003)(106116001)(106356001)(2906002)(105586002)(230783001)(102836003)(87936001)(6116002)(86362001)(5001960100002)(1220700001)(1096002)(3846002)(5008740100001)(5001770100001)(189998001)(76176999)(2900100001)(74316001)(11100500001)(76576001)(4326007)(2950100001)(122556002)(77096005)(2501003)(92566002)(101416001)(19580405001)(15975445007)(19580395003)(5003600100002)(54356999)(40100003)(66066001)(81156007)(50986999)(33656002)(10400500002)(5002640100001)(5004730100002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:SN1PR0501MB1712; H:SN1PR0501MB1709.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 12 Jan 2016 13:23:42.0486 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SN1PR0501MB1712 Archived-At: Cc: "draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 13:23:47 -0000 Support. It improves the stability of an EVPN network. Yours Irrespectively, John > -----Original Message----- > From: BESS [mailto:bess-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Martin Vigoureux > Sent: Monday, January 11, 2016 4:08 AM > To: bess@ietf.org > Cc: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election@tools.ietf.org > Subject: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 >=20 > Hello working group, >=20 > This email starts a two-week poll on adopting > draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 [1] as a working group item. >=20 > Please state on the list if you support adoption or not (in the both case= s, > please also state the reasons). >=20 > This poll runs until *the 25th of January*. >=20 > Currently no IPR has been disclosed against this document. >=20 > *Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that appli= es to > this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in compliance with IETF= IPR > rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). >=20 > =3D=3D> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please re= spond > to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant I= PR. >=20 > The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from eac= h > author and contributor. >=20 > If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please explicitly > respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet been disclosed = in > conformance with IETF rules. >=20 > Thank you, >=20 > Martin & Thomas > bess chairs >=20 > [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election/ >=20 > _______________________________________________ > BESS mailing list > BESS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess From nobody Tue Jan 12 05:56:09 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 353451B2A11 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 05:56:08 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.502 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.502 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, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 pdg-XT3XKdP3 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 05:56:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from bgl-iport-4.cisco.com (bgl-iport-4.cisco.com [72.163.197.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E90171B2A0E for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 05:56:05 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1475; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1452606966; x=1453816566; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=/0wEYF7CdPGdMvVh9vCzgyL0tJg64jMWfLGYmKUhFMw=; b=Cr0JoOCp0IH6HcmMno35z3uiM75bsVwX2w7im1IThkJqiMSiDx4oZnaR qg6WJA89YZ3ovm7d3iDn90EwFBqjd6YgVLg5/jcOJHR3c5+RPexQZ9VST 8xl4wFwXwSp+Ym2ZUqrIK6unB6JEiye/ud7v/TGm52K3i+uK5gPYJr49Q s=; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,557,1444694400"; d="scan'208";a="27186403" Received: from vla196-nat.cisco.com (HELO bgl-core-2.cisco.com) ([72.163.197.24]) by bgl-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 12 Jan 2016 13:56:02 +0000 Received: from [10.70.233.129] ([10.70.233.129]) by bgl-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u0CDu1Ph009417; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 13:56:01 GMT To: martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com, bess@ietf.org References: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> From: Shishio Tsuchiya Message-ID: <569505F1.8060203@cisco.com> Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 22:56:01 +0900 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-2022-jp Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Cc: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election@tools.ietf.org, shtsuchi@cisco.com Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 13:56:08 -0000 Support to improve reliability of EVPN network. Regards, -Shishio On 2016/01/11 18:07, Martin Vigoureux wrote: > Hello working group, > > This email starts a two-week poll on adopting > draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 [1] as a working group item. > > Please state on the list if you support adoption or not (in the both cases, please also state the reasons). > > This poll runs until *the 25th of January*. > > Currently no IPR has been disclosed against this document. > > *Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that > applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in > compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 > and 5378 for more details). > > ==> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please > respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. > > The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from > each author and contributor. > > If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. > > Thank you, > > Martin & Thomas > bess chairs > > [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election/ > > _______________________________________________ > BESS mailing list > BESS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess > . > From nobody Tue Jan 12 06:11:15 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58C661B2A2D for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 06:11:14 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.502 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.502 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, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 ooFT7kRKzw1G for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 06:11:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from alln-iport-5.cisco.com (alln-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.142.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B1FF11B2A28 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 06:11:12 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2569; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1452607872; x=1453817472; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=YW//VatMi8L1mFm9NG6eFdqf3GTY4Qoqb0KocRlkP8M=; b=GGcbT+pM7bjsm55ssJYD8KBTmqkEqZuXHsJMQO/CKeEFww3XQJg1NbqT zdyviZXh7h7EJLxyG0lST74duj/2xjD7Pnwm9u7JqxRK2/PyWRCMF+ma2 mMumoXOtvQNxXXGcWA6Ae2SSBknC49nEWsT5YbPVrRTp3EEUdGGOYxKev w=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0AKAgAECZVW/4MNJK1bA4M6Um0GiFOzI?= =?us-ascii?q?AENgWYYCoVtAoEmOBQBAQEBAQEBgQqENQEBBAEBAWMICw4CAgEIGC4bDAslAgQ?= =?us-ascii?q?BDQWILg6wao5mAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBGASGUoR/hCYRASoWERWEH?= =?us-ascii?q?wWNeYkaAYVCiBaBXkqDeYdBgRqOUgEgAQFChApyAYRnBxcjAYEHAQEB?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,557,1444694400"; d="scan'208";a="224735151" Received: from alln-core-1.cisco.com ([173.36.13.131]) by alln-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 12 Jan 2016 14:11:11 +0000 Received: from XCH-RTP-006.cisco.com (xch-rtp-006.cisco.com [64.101.220.146]) by alln-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u0CEBB8w004835 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 12 Jan 2016 14:11:11 GMT Received: from xch-rtp-009.cisco.com (64.101.220.149) by XCH-RTP-006.cisco.com (64.101.220.146) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 09:11:10 -0500 Received: from xch-rtp-009.cisco.com ([64.101.220.149]) by XCH-RTP-009.cisco.com ([64.101.220.149]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 09:11:10 -0500 From: "Patrice Brissette (pbrisset)" To: "martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com" , "bess@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 Thread-Index: AQHRTUMWwGSGnzIXX0mubxkvffuYaw== Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 14:11:10 +0000 Message-ID: References: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> <569505F1.8060203@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <569505F1.8060203@cisco.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [161.44.212.177] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-ID: <3F800CA48B4EE446BEEEE75D2A5FC3E9@emea.cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 14:11:14 -0000 I=B9m supporting this document. This document improves and clarifies greatly DH/MH EVPN scenarios. It is also an awesome extension to RFC7432 and proposes a better DF algorithm.=20 Regards, Patrice Patrice Brissette TECHNICAL LEADER.ENGINEERING pbrisset@cisco.com Phone: +1 613 254 3336 Cisco Systems Canada Co. / Les Systemes Cisco Canada CIE Canada Cisco.com Think before you print.This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. Please click here=20 for Company Registration Information. >On 2016/01/11 18:07, Martin Vigoureux wrote: >> Hello working group, >>=20 >> This email starts a two-week poll on adopting >> draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 [1] as a working group item. >>=20 >> Please state on the list if you support adoption or not (in the both >>cases, please also state the reasons). >>=20 >> This poll runs until *the 25th of January*. >>=20 >> Currently no IPR has been disclosed against this document. >>=20 >> *Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that >> applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in >> compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 >> and 5378 for more details). >>=20 >> =3D=3D> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please >> respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any >>relevant IPR. >>=20 >> The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from >> each author and contributor. >>=20 >> If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please >>explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet >>been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. >>=20 >> Thank you, >>=20 >> Martin & Thomas >> bess chairs >>=20 >> [1]=20 >>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election/ >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> BESS mailing list >> BESS@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess >> . >>=20 > > >_______________________________________________ >BESS mailing list >BESS@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess From nobody Tue Jan 12 08:12:45 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7341F1B2B03 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 08:12:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.265 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.265 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, KHOP_DYNAMIC=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 2WBbnhjvA7eG for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 08:12:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.149.140]) (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 EB7791B2ADF for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 08:12:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0049297.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049297.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.15.0.59/8.15.0.59) with SMTP id u0CGA7oR002272; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 11:12:40 -0500 Received: from alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp7.sbc.com [144.160.229.24]) by m0049297.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 20ayt66r1p-1 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 12 Jan 2016 11:12:40 -0500 Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u0CGCcmM021964; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 11:12:39 -0500 Received: from mlpi408.sfdc.sbc.com (mlpi408.sfdc.sbc.com [130.9.128.240]) by alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u0CGCTso021810 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 12 Jan 2016 11:12:31 -0500 Received: from MISOUT7MSGHUBAH.ITServices.sbc.com (MISOUT7MSGHUBAH.itservices.sbc.com [130.9.129.152]) by mlpi408.sfdc.sbc.com (RSA Interceptor); Tue, 12 Jan 2016 16:12:07 GMT Received: from MISOUT7MSGUSRCD.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.4.129]) by MISOUT7MSGHUBAH.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.9.129.152]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 11:12:07 -0500 From: "UTTARO, JAMES" To: "'Patrice Brissette (pbrisset)'" , "'martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com'" , "'bess@ietf.org'" Thread-Topic: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 Thread-Index: AQHRTUD4ZPU3B6YxDUW1UfvnELSNYZ74P3wA///N7DA= Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 16:12:06 +0000 Message-ID: References: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> <569505F1.8060203@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.91.76.236] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-RSA-Inspected: yes X-RSA-Classifications: public X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2016-01-12_07:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1507310008 definitions=main-1601120291 Archived-At: Cc: "'draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election@tools.ietf.org'" Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 16:12:44 -0000 +1 Jim uttaro -----Original Message----- From: BESS [mailto:bess-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Patrice Brissette (p= brisset) Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2016 9:11 AM To: martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com; bess@ietf.org Cc: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-= 02 I=B9m supporting this document. This document improves and clarifies greatly DH/MH EVPN scenarios. It is also an awesome extension to RFC7432 and proposes a better DF algorithm.=20 Regards, Patrice Patrice Brissette TECHNICAL LEADER.ENGINEERING pbrisset@cisco.com Phone: +1 613 254 3336 Cisco Systems Canada Co. / Les Systemes Cisco Canada CIE Canada Cisco.com Think before you print.This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. Please click here=20 for Company Registration Information. >On 2016/01/11 18:07, Martin Vigoureux wrote: >> Hello working group, >>=20 >> This email starts a two-week poll on adopting >> draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 [1] as a working group item. >>=20 >> Please state on the list if you support adoption or not (in the both >>cases, please also state the reasons). >>=20 >> This poll runs until *the 25th of January*. >>=20 >> Currently no IPR has been disclosed against this document. >>=20 >> *Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that >> applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in >> compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 >> and 5378 for more details). >>=20 >> =3D=3D> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please >> respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any >>relevant IPR. >>=20 >> The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from >> each author and contributor. >>=20 >> If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please >>explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet >>been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. >>=20 >> Thank you, >>=20 >> Martin & Thomas >> bess chairs >>=20 >> [1]=20 >>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election/ >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> BESS mailing list >> BESS@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess >> . >>=20 > > >_______________________________________________ >BESS mailing list >BESS@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess _______________________________________________ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess From nobody Tue Jan 12 08:46:51 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AE111B2B32 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 08:46:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.502 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.502 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, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 Yvm_6F6ZUSaL for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 08:46:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from alln-iport-4.cisco.com (alln-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.142.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 138801A8773 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 08:46:48 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1558; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1452617208; x=1453826808; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=LvNud5HHOL0Ppb5/NGa5Hfq99AteMOopTfayCLNmxX4=; b=Xt88P3ZJu7A6g4CVyj/hNNhS5smxWmzG3HJCyRF20wQDyLTKZaF0NftX zlkzc977f90/A9qLvlnfuW9N8qKXtN4LhGHLigawO/9Wugmcaa70/BSTm od4eDCeZlB5T2D7k2ZZlyuUJQN/pmpgL43B93hhLTbPuv+3hacvZ21MT9 4=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0AaAgCVLJVW/4ENJK1egzpSbQaIU7MlA?= =?us-ascii?q?Q2BZBgKhW0CgSg4FAEBAQEBAQGBCoQ1AQEEAQEBawsQAgEIRicLJQIEAQ0FiC4?= =?us-ascii?q?Ov30BAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEUBItVhCYRAYUFBY15iRoBhUKIFoFeh?= =?us-ascii?q?EOIW45SASABAUKECnKFAjqBCAEBAQ?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,558,1444694400"; d="scan'208";a="225767446" Received: from alln-core-9.cisco.com ([173.36.13.129]) by alln-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 12 Jan 2016 16:46:47 +0000 Received: from XCH-RTP-001.cisco.com (xch-rtp-001.cisco.com [64.101.220.141]) by alln-core-9.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u0CGkknn014546 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 12 Jan 2016 16:46:47 GMT Received: from xch-rtp-005.cisco.com (64.101.220.145) by XCH-RTP-001.cisco.com (64.101.220.141) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 11:46:46 -0500 Received: from xch-rtp-005.cisco.com ([64.101.220.145]) by XCH-RTP-005.cisco.com ([64.101.220.145]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 11:46:46 -0500 From: "Ali Sajassi (sajassi)" To: Martin Vigoureux , "bess@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 Thread-Index: AQHRTE+ouiwerpGR4kilfQdP5VFvwZ735rkA Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 16:46:46 +0000 Message-ID: References: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.5.8.151023 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.19.76.57] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 16:46:49 -0000 Support as a co-author. Not aware of any IPR that hasn=B9t already been disclosed. On 1/11/16, 1:07 AM, "BESS on behalf of Martin Vigoureux" wrote: >Hello working group, > >This email starts a two-week poll on adopting >draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 [1] as a working group item. > >Please state on the list if you support adoption or not (in the both >cases, please also state the reasons). > >This poll runs until *the 25th of January*. > >Currently no IPR has been disclosed against this document. > >*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that >applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in >compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 >and 5378 for more details). > >=3D=3D> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please >respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any >relevant IPR. > >The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from >each author and contributor. > >If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please >explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet >been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. > >Thank you, > >Martin & Thomas >bess chairs > >[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election/ > >_______________________________________________ >BESS mailing list >BESS@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess From nobody Tue Jan 12 08:54:17 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECA931B2B50 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 08:54:13 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.502 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.502 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, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 QktxvdbqColA for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 08:54:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from aer-iport-1.cisco.com (aer-iport-1.cisco.com [173.38.203.51]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 263241B2B52 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 08:54:09 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2596; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1452617649; x=1453827249; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=ncrCeRZFYyLiuLW7Fqj1OEU0i+pvSJI/a3r/N0UVItk=; b=MNEqzAZWBpaGAVRdVCLxyCodSu2zLSeZI40ivif02ba0kUMZOTUfwwt+ vnqiza8KR1DaOrri4t3LdxX46ktBr2pt+4+xW5KSedQGoTA0WjK0S+RMp DW6EqCLd3f6P7OmCQPxIAoqKi5vxiHcsAVEW17YEVUCDKbVlHK/Mfuj9Z A=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0DQAQD9LpVW/xbLJq1ehAxfDgaIU7MlA?= =?us-ascii?q?Q2BZBgKhW0CHIFEFAEBAQEBAQGBCoQ1AQEEAQEBIBE6CxACAQgaAiYCAgIlCxU?= =?us-ascii?q?QAgQBDQWILg6vWJAvAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBFASBAYVVhH+EJhEBH?= =?us-ascii?q?RiDB4FJAQSXEwGFQogWgV6EQ4hbjlIBIAEBQoQKcoUCOoEIAQEB?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,558,1444694400"; d="scan'208";a="648451711" Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-1.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 12 Jan 2016 16:54:05 +0000 Received: from XCH-RTP-020.cisco.com (xch-rtp-020.cisco.com [64.101.220.160]) by aer-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u0CGs4LC031635 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 12 Jan 2016 16:54:05 GMT Received: from xch-rtp-017.cisco.com (64.101.220.157) by XCH-RTP-020.cisco.com (64.101.220.160) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 11:54:03 -0500 Received: from xch-rtp-017.cisco.com ([64.101.220.157]) by XCH-RTP-017.cisco.com ([64.101.220.157]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 11:54:03 -0500 From: "Keyur Patel (keyupate)" To: "Keyur Patel (keyupate)" , "Satya Mohanty (satyamoh)" , Martin Vigoureux , "bess@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 Thread-Index: AQHRTE+scgVMqx727E+HEhg3VHSowZ731+MAgAAo2ICAAH7jAA== Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 16:54:03 +0000 Message-ID: References: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.4.9.150325 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.228.42.211] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <302B1E2C61F1B249A06B4CC18EA68D61@emea.cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 16:54:14 -0000 Tm90IGF3YXJlIG9mIGFueSBJUFIgdGhhdCBoYXNuwrl0IGFscmVhZHkgYmVlbiBkaXNjbG9zZWQu DQoNCg0KT24gMS8xMi8xNiwgMTA6MTkgQU0sICJLZXl1ciBQYXRlbCAoa2V5dXBhdGUpIiA8a2V5 dXBhdGVAY2lzY28uY29tPiB3cm90ZToNCg0KPlN1cHBvcnQgYXMgYSBjby1hdXRob3IuDQo+DQo+ UmVnYXJkcywNCj5LZXl1cg0KPg0KPk9uIDEvMTIvMTYsIDg6NTMgQU0sICJTYXR5YSBNb2hhbnR5 IChzYXR5YW1vaCkiIDxzYXR5YW1vaEBjaXNjby5jb20+DQo+d3JvdGU6DQo+DQo+PlN1cHBvcnQg YXMgY28tYXV0aG9yLg0KPj4NCj4+VGhhbmtzLA0KPj7igLlTYXR5YQ0KPj4NCj4+T24gMS8xMS8x NiwgMTowNyBBTSwgIkJFU1Mgb24gYmVoYWxmIG9mIE1hcnRpbiBWaWdvdXJldXgiDQo+PjxiZXNz LWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmcgb24gYmVoYWxmIG9mIG1hcnRpbi52aWdvdXJldXhAYWxjYXRlbC1s dWNlbnQuY29tPg0KPj53cm90ZToNCj4+DQo+Pj5IZWxsbyB3b3JraW5nIGdyb3VwLA0KPj4+DQo+ Pj5UaGlzIGVtYWlsIHN0YXJ0cyBhIHR3by13ZWVrIHBvbGwgb24gYWRvcHRpbmcNCj4+PmRyYWZ0 LW1vaGFudHktYmVzcy1ldnBuLWRmLWVsZWN0aW9uLTAyIFsxXSBhcyBhIHdvcmtpbmcgZ3JvdXAg aXRlbS4NCj4+Pg0KPj4+UGxlYXNlIHN0YXRlIG9uIHRoZSBsaXN0IGlmIHlvdSBzdXBwb3J0IGFk b3B0aW9uIG9yIG5vdCAoaW4gdGhlIGJvdGgNCj4+PmNhc2VzLCBwbGVhc2UgYWxzbyBzdGF0ZSB0 aGUgcmVhc29ucykuDQo+Pj4NCj4+PlRoaXMgcG9sbCBydW5zIHVudGlsICp0aGUgMjV0aCBvZiBK YW51YXJ5Ki4NCj4+Pg0KPj4+Q3VycmVudGx5IG5vIElQUiBoYXMgYmVlbiBkaXNjbG9zZWQgYWdh aW5zdCB0aGlzIGRvY3VtZW50Lg0KPj4+DQo+Pj4qQ29pbmNpZGVudGFsbHkqLCB3ZSBhcmUgYWxz byBwb2xsaW5nIGZvciBrbm93bGVkZ2Ugb2YgYW55IElQUiB0aGF0DQo+Pj5hcHBsaWVzIHRvIHRo aXMgZHJhZnQsIHRvIGVuc3VyZSB0aGF0IElQUiBoYXMgYmVlbiBkaXNjbG9zZWQgaW4NCj4+PmNv bXBsaWFuY2Ugd2l0aCBJRVRGIElQUiBydWxlcyAoc2VlIFJGQ3MgMzk3OSwgNDg3OSwgMzY2OQ0K Pj4+YW5kIDUzNzggZm9yIG1vcmUgZGV0YWlscykuDQo+Pj4NCj4+Pj09PiAqSWYqIHlvdSBhcmUg bGlzdGVkIGFzIGEgZG9jdW1lbnQgYXV0aG9yIG9yIGNvbnRyaWJ1dG9yIHBsZWFzZQ0KPj4+cmVz cG9uZCB0byB0aGlzIGVtYWlsIGFuZCBpbmRpY2F0ZSB3aGV0aGVyIG9yIG5vdCB5b3UgYXJlIGF3 YXJlIG9mIGFueQ0KPj4+cmVsZXZhbnQgSVBSLg0KPj4+DQo+Pj5UaGUgZHJhZnQgd2lsbCBub3Qg YmUgYWRvcHRlZCB1bnRpbCBhIHJlc3BvbnNlIGhhcyBiZWVuIHJlY2VpdmVkIGZyb20NCj4+PmVh Y2ggYXV0aG9yIGFuZCBjb250cmlidXRvci4NCj4+Pg0KPj4+SWYgeW91IGFyZSBub3QgbGlzdGVk IGFzIGFuIGF1dGhvciBvciBjb250cmlidXRvciwgdGhlbiBwbGVhc2UNCj4+PmV4cGxpY2l0bHkg cmVzcG9uZCBvbmx5IGlmIHlvdSBhcmUgYXdhcmUgb2YgYW55IElQUiB0aGF0IGhhcyBub3QgeWV0 DQo+Pj5iZWVuIGRpc2Nsb3NlZCBpbiBjb25mb3JtYW5jZSB3aXRoIElFVEYgcnVsZXMuDQo+Pj4N Cj4+PlRoYW5rIHlvdSwNCj4+Pg0KPj4+TWFydGluICYgVGhvbWFzDQo+Pj5iZXNzIGNoYWlycw0K Pj4+DQo+Pj5bMV0gDQo+Pj5odHRwczovL2RhdGF0cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3JnL2RvYy9kcmFmdC1t b2hhbnR5LWJlc3MtZXZwbi1kZi1lbGVjdGlvbi8NCj4+Pg0KPj4+X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCj4+PkJFU1MgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQo+Pj5C RVNTQGlldGYub3JnDQo+Pj5odHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL2Jl c3MNCj4+DQo+DQoNCg== From nobody Tue Jan 12 09:27:22 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 141A21A00EE for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 09:27:22 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 JRgFwY-utkxf for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 09:27:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2on0144.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.100.144]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E40051A00EA for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 09:27:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from SN1PR0501MB1709.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.163.130.155) by SN1PR0501MB1711.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.163.130.157) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.361.13; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 17:27:18 +0000 Received: from SN1PR0501MB1709.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.163.130.155]) by SN1PR0501MB1709.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.163.130.155]) with mapi id 15.01.0361.006; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 17:27:18 +0000 From: John E Drake To: Martin Vigoureux , "bess@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 Thread-Index: AQHRTE+xZPU3B6YxDUW1UfvnELSNYZ734BBQgABEOLA= Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 17:27:18 +0000 Message-ID: References: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=jdrake@juniper.net; x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.14] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; SN1PR0501MB1711; 5:pZHYF9w6kPFbh86XbW1Q3eufk22SLDHc6Xa/pRncE0ZQ5USf5jsBa512/4592BUANCCggOpW4KxspZ3PT/LarNBSHQ4BN3IkJLHrbk8jGM6XHyTBzCbLsej5rFBxKUA6XVlyeQpzxVkatbRwfZFD1w==; 24:hTbac6Ki+GDuqvOD06mPvqUKTeFO3YiSYOQ6C4g3GXXnmo3w97TJUYe75q/gHuSzey1b04mSjYxdmTM/UUnjAhcYTNIlY66ZHAlRemB9x4Q= x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:SN1PR0501MB1711; x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 3f02c9f9-6d2b-412e-86c1-08d31b759f3b x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(520078)(8121501046)(3002001)(10201501046); SRVR:SN1PR0501MB1711; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:SN1PR0501MB1711; x-forefront-prvs: 081904387B x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(199003)(13464003)(377454003)(189002)(3846002)(66066001)(102836003)(76576001)(5001770100001)(6116002)(92566002)(81156007)(97736004)(5002640100001)(230783001)(5001960100002)(5004730100002)(1096002)(189998001)(15975445007)(586003)(2906002)(11100500001)(1220700001)(2900100001)(4326007)(5003600100002)(77096005)(74316001)(106116001)(2501003)(99286002)(105586002)(33656002)(54356999)(19580395003)(19580405001)(101416001)(40100003)(106356001)(122556002)(5008740100001)(10400500002)(76176999)(86362001)(87936001)(50986999); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:SN1PR0501MB1711; H:SN1PR0501MB1709.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 12 Jan 2016 17:27:18.4843 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SN1PR0501MB1711 Archived-At: Cc: "draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 17:27:22 -0000 No IPR Yours Irrespectively, John > -----Original Message----- > From: John E Drake > Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2016 8:24 AM > To: 'Martin Vigoureux'; bess@ietf.org > Cc: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election@tools.ietf.org > Subject: RE: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-electio= n- > 02 >=20 > Support. It improves the stability of an EVPN network. >=20 > Yours Irrespectively, >=20 > John >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: BESS [mailto:bess-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Martin > > Vigoureux > > Sent: Monday, January 11, 2016 4:08 AM > > To: bess@ietf.org > > Cc: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election@tools.ietf.org > > Subject: [bess] Poll for adoption: > > draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 > > > > Hello working group, > > > > This email starts a two-week poll on adopting > > draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 [1] as a working group item. > > > > Please state on the list if you support adoption or not (in the both > > cases, please also state the reasons). > > > > This poll runs until *the 25th of January*. > > > > Currently no IPR has been disclosed against this document. > > > > *Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that > > applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in > > compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for > more details). > > > > =3D=3D> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please > > respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any > relevant IPR. > > > > The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from > > each author and contributor. > > > > If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please > > explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet > > been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. > > > > Thank you, > > > > Martin & Thomas > > bess chairs > > > > [1] > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > BESS mailing list > > BESS@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess From nobody Tue Jan 12 11:36:51 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 172EF1A01C6 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 11:36:50 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] 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 8IIjEKX-IDVz for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 11:36:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from usplmg21.ericsson.net (usplmg21.ericsson.net [198.24.6.65]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4D8331A01A8 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 11:36:48 -0800 (PST) X-AuditID: c6180641-f799c6d000007d66-cf-569555c080e9 Received: from EUSAAHC005.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [147.117.188.87]) by usplmg21.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id A2.B3.32102.0C555965; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 20:36:33 +0100 (CET) Received: from EUSAAMB103.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.120]) by EUSAAHC005.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.87]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 14:36:46 -0500 From: Antoni Przygienda To: "Keyur Patel (keyupate)" , "Satya Mohanty (satyamoh)" , Martin Vigoureux , "bess@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 Thread-Index: AQHRTE+mGpfmzZDcHUSNx/Nnj7Op65731+MAgAAYGYCAAH7kgP//2W4w Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 19:36:46 +0000 Message-ID: <2E4BB27CAB87BF43B4207C0E55860F180EB5AA18@eusaamb103.ericsson.se> References: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [147.117.188.10] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFprKIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyuXRPuO7B0KlhBrenClmsOD6T2eLmpmms Fo1bz7NZ3Nn1hdXi0alJjA6sHq3P9rJ6TPm9kdVjyZKfTB5fLn9mC2CJ4rJJSc3JLEst0rdL 4Mr4d/UbY8E5mYovTX8ZGxg/SHcxcnJICJhIzPg1gxnCFpO4cG89WxcjF4eQwBFGiUsXJzFB OMsZJRat3QZWxSZgIXH521NmkISIwH5Giavd55hAEswC+RLfL69nBLGFBXwlHnedAmsQEQiQ 2DptESuE7Saxe91lsBoWAVWJBadXsIPYvED1D/ZchFq9EGjblbVgQzkFDCS2LWtiA7EZge77 fmoN1DJxiVtP5jNB3C0gsWTPeagfRCVePv7HCmErSUxaeg7I5gCq15RYv0sfolVRYkr3Q6i9 ghInZz5hmcAoNgvJ1FkIHbOQdMxC0rGAkWUVI0dpcUFObrqR4SZGYGQdk2Bz3MG4t9fzEKMA B6MSD+8H4ylhQqyJZcWVuYcYJTiYlUR4F3tPDRPiTUmsrEotyo8vKs1JLT7EKM3BoiTOmyjT GCYkkJ5YkpqdmlqQWgSTZeLglGpgFJm46waf27kqzvAr6g2KJodWPObhPH3gubFF/Kv0T7Yi s77UiD/OY1vL/UpS9bi7w47pFzZz/tAQuhfHtitO/LqkycXnWz6onjgVtYmt/VxNGUeUbMiE 5cKdz1/ufjxlxpOG+D7hM8dXMEob6SneffvQwSA0etkzecdpa4RveR2/wX3eIHNJixJLcUai oRZzUXEiAFjHj7CoAgAA Archived-At: Cc: "draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 19:36:50 -0000 Tm90IGF3YXJlIG9mIGFueSBJUFIgLi4uIA0KDQp0aGFua3MgDQoNCi0tLSB0b255DQpfX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCuKAnFNpbXBsZSwgY2xlYXIg cHVycG9zZSBhbmQgcHJpbmNpcGxlcyBnaXZlIHJpc2UgdG8gY29tcGxleCBhbmQgaW50ZWxsaWdl bnQgYmVoYXZpb3IuIENvbXBsZXggcnVsZXMgYW5kIHJlZ3VsYXRpb25zIGdpdmUgcmlzZSB0byBz aW1wbGUgYW5kIHN0dXBpZCBiZWhhdmlvci7igJ0gDQotLS0gRGVlIEhvY2sgDQoNCg0KPiAtLS0t LU9yaWdpbmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0tLQ0KPiBGcm9tOiBLZXl1ciBQYXRlbCAoa2V5dXBhdGUpIFtt YWlsdG86a2V5dXBhdGVAY2lzY28uY29tXQ0KPiBTZW50OiBUdWVzZGF5LCBKYW51YXJ5IDEyLCAy MDE2IDg6NTQgQU0NCj4gVG86IEtleXVyIFBhdGVsIChrZXl1cGF0ZSk7IFNhdHlhIE1vaGFudHkg KHNhdHlhbW9oKTsgTWFydGluIFZpZ291cmV1eDsNCj4gYmVzc0BpZXRmLm9yZw0KPiBDYzogZHJh ZnQtbW9oYW50eS1iZXNzLWV2cG4tZGYtZWxlY3Rpb25AdG9vbHMuaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4gU3ViamVj dDogUmU6IFtiZXNzXSBQb2xsIGZvciBhZG9wdGlvbjogZHJhZnQtbW9oYW50eS1iZXNzLWV2cG4t ZGYtZWxlY3Rpb24tMDINCj4gDQo+IE5vdCBhd2FyZSBvZiBhbnkgSVBSIHRoYXQgaGFzbsK5dCBh bHJlYWR5IGJlZW4gZGlzY2xvc2VkLg0KPiANCj4gDQo+IE9uIDEvMTIvMTYsIDEwOjE5IEFNLCAi S2V5dXIgUGF0ZWwgKGtleXVwYXRlKSIgPGtleXVwYXRlQGNpc2NvLmNvbT4NCj4gd3JvdGU6DQo+ IA0KPiA+U3VwcG9ydCBhcyBhIGNvLWF1dGhvci4NCj4gPg0KPiA+UmVnYXJkcywNCj4gPktleXVy DQo+ID4NCj4gPk9uIDEvMTIvMTYsIDg6NTMgQU0sICJTYXR5YSBNb2hhbnR5IChzYXR5YW1vaCki IDxzYXR5YW1vaEBjaXNjby5jb20+DQo+ID53cm90ZToNCj4gPg0KPiA+PlN1cHBvcnQgYXMgY28t YXV0aG9yLg0KPiA+Pg0KPiA+PlRoYW5rcywNCj4gPj7igLlTYXR5YQ0KPiA+Pg0KPiA+Pk9uIDEv MTEvMTYsIDE6MDcgQU0sICJCRVNTIG9uIGJlaGFsZiBvZiBNYXJ0aW4gVmlnb3VyZXV4Ig0KPiA+ PjxiZXNzLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmcgb24gYmVoYWxmIG9mDQo+ID4+bWFydGluLnZpZ291cmV1 eEBhbGNhdGVsLWx1Y2VudC5jb20+DQo+ID4+d3JvdGU6DQo+ID4+DQo+ID4+PkhlbGxvIHdvcmtp bmcgZ3JvdXAsDQo+ID4+Pg0KPiA+Pj5UaGlzIGVtYWlsIHN0YXJ0cyBhIHR3by13ZWVrIHBvbGwg b24gYWRvcHRpbmcNCj4gPj4+ZHJhZnQtbW9oYW50eS1iZXNzLWV2cG4tZGYtZWxlY3Rpb24tMDIg WzFdIGFzIGEgd29ya2luZyBncm91cCBpdGVtLg0KPiA+Pj4NCj4gPj4+UGxlYXNlIHN0YXRlIG9u IHRoZSBsaXN0IGlmIHlvdSBzdXBwb3J0IGFkb3B0aW9uIG9yIG5vdCAoaW4gdGhlIGJvdGgNCj4g Pj4+Y2FzZXMsIHBsZWFzZSBhbHNvIHN0YXRlIHRoZSByZWFzb25zKS4NCj4gPj4+DQo+ID4+PlRo aXMgcG9sbCBydW5zIHVudGlsICp0aGUgMjV0aCBvZiBKYW51YXJ5Ki4NCj4gPj4+DQo+ID4+PkN1 cnJlbnRseSBubyBJUFIgaGFzIGJlZW4gZGlzY2xvc2VkIGFnYWluc3QgdGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudC4N Cj4gPj4+DQo+ID4+PipDb2luY2lkZW50YWxseSosIHdlIGFyZSBhbHNvIHBvbGxpbmcgZm9yIGtu b3dsZWRnZSBvZiBhbnkgSVBSIHRoYXQNCj4gPj4+YXBwbGllcyB0byB0aGlzIGRyYWZ0LCB0byBl bnN1cmUgdGhhdCBJUFIgaGFzIGJlZW4gZGlzY2xvc2VkIGluDQo+ID4+PmNvbXBsaWFuY2Ugd2l0 aCBJRVRGIElQUiBydWxlcyAoc2VlIFJGQ3MgMzk3OSwgNDg3OSwgMzY2OSBhbmQgNTM3OA0KPiA+ Pj5mb3IgbW9yZSBkZXRhaWxzKS4NCj4gPj4+DQo+ID4+Pj09PiAqSWYqIHlvdSBhcmUgbGlzdGVk IGFzIGEgZG9jdW1lbnQgYXV0aG9yIG9yIGNvbnRyaWJ1dG9yIHBsZWFzZQ0KPiA+Pj5yZXNwb25k IHRvIHRoaXMgZW1haWwgYW5kIGluZGljYXRlIHdoZXRoZXIgb3Igbm90IHlvdSBhcmUgYXdhcmUg b2YNCj4gPj4+YW55IHJlbGV2YW50IElQUi4NCj4gPj4+DQo+ID4+PlRoZSBkcmFmdCB3aWxsIG5v dCBiZSBhZG9wdGVkIHVudGlsIGEgcmVzcG9uc2UgaGFzIGJlZW4gcmVjZWl2ZWQgZnJvbQ0KPiA+ Pj5lYWNoIGF1dGhvciBhbmQgY29udHJpYnV0b3IuDQo+ID4+Pg0KPiA+Pj5JZiB5b3UgYXJlIG5v dCBsaXN0ZWQgYXMgYW4gYXV0aG9yIG9yIGNvbnRyaWJ1dG9yLCB0aGVuIHBsZWFzZQ0KPiA+Pj5l eHBsaWNpdGx5IHJlc3BvbmQgb25seSBpZiB5b3UgYXJlIGF3YXJlIG9mIGFueSBJUFIgdGhhdCBo YXMgbm90IHlldA0KPiA+Pj5iZWVuIGRpc2Nsb3NlZCBpbiBjb25mb3JtYW5jZSB3aXRoIElFVEYg cnVsZXMuDQo+ID4+Pg0KPiA+Pj5UaGFuayB5b3UsDQo+ID4+Pg0KPiA+Pj5NYXJ0aW4gJiBUaG9t YXMNCj4gPj4+YmVzcyBjaGFpcnMNCj4gPj4+DQo+ID4+PlsxXQ0KPiA+Pj5odHRwczovL2RhdGF0 cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3JnL2RvYy9kcmFmdC1tb2hhbnR5LWJlc3MtZXZwbi1kZi1lbGVjdGlvbi8N Cj4gPj4+DQo+ID4+Pl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fDQo+ID4+PkJFU1MgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQo+ID4+PkJFU1NAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4gPj4+aHR0 cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9iZXNzDQo+ID4+DQo+ID4NCg0K From nobody Tue Jan 12 11:44:58 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B32A01A8784 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 11:44:57 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.502 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.502 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, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 dQr25tbuHqSO for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 11:44:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from alln-iport-8.cisco.com (alln-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.142.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 476981A8782 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 11:44:56 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1514; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1452627896; x=1453837496; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=7cEAIWpxUL+rmLUl85qER6Ww1H2EGIqzf/aAwr5YQwM=; b=QiJVkoIQkRRogBiWGwnCGoH5oHh22E/QA66PEdvdUl94OaTDOLc9pObt Sgujma3yNVR9rMmA7RJjawIgoJfRXre9v1h5fOCCo3wiIGLLiLNXXmqD0 4ccymPZxGqbtKiW6P9IBAR/XdAwPLOjMS+nDHsaviFu2blUPghfvTDHFM M=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0AaAgAdV5VW/5FdJa1egzpSbQaIU7MlA?= =?us-ascii?q?Q2BZBgKhW0CgSw4FAEBAQEBAQGBCoQ1AQEEAQEBNzQLEAIBCDYQJwslAgQBDQW?= =?us-ascii?q?ILg7ABgEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARQEhlYBhH6EJhEBhQUFlxMBhUKIF?= =?us-ascii?q?oFehEOIW45SASABAUKECnKFAjqBCAEBAQ?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,285,1449532800"; d="scan'208";a="226558879" Received: from rcdn-core-9.cisco.com ([173.37.93.145]) by alln-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 12 Jan 2016 19:44:55 +0000 Received: from XCH-RCD-017.cisco.com (xch-rcd-017.cisco.com [173.37.102.27]) by rcdn-core-9.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u0CJitCi020172 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 12 Jan 2016 19:44:55 GMT Received: from xch-rcd-019.cisco.com (173.37.102.29) by XCH-RCD-017.cisco.com (173.37.102.27) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 13:44:54 -0600 Received: from xch-rcd-019.cisco.com ([173.37.102.29]) by XCH-RCD-019.cisco.com ([173.37.102.29]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 13:44:54 -0600 From: "Arjun Sreekantiah (asreekan)" To: Martin Vigoureux , "bess@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 Thread-Index: AQHRTE+sQ0hewWA6ZEuT37/SOjVP1Z74KUOA Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 19:44:54 +0000 Message-ID: References: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.5.6.150930 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.154.200.223] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <0A7E86590F3CF242A8F0DEE26AF6734B@emea.cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 19:44:57 -0000 Support the adoption of the draft. Arjun On 1/11/16, 1:07 AM, "BESS on behalf of Martin Vigoureux" wrote: >Hello working group, > >This email starts a two-week poll on adopting >draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 [1] as a working group item. > >Please state on the list if you support adoption or not (in the both >cases, please also state the reasons). > >This poll runs until *the 25th of January*. > >Currently no IPR has been disclosed against this document. > >*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that >applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in >compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 >and 5378 for more details). > >=3D=3D> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please >respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any >relevant IPR. > >The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from >each author and contributor. > >If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please >explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet >been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. > >Thank you, > >Martin & Thomas >bess chairs > >[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election/ > >_______________________________________________ >BESS mailing list >BESS@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess From nobody Tue Jan 12 12:26:43 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 398F91A888F for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 12:26:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.502 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.502 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, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 JxJ7wvekl_7s for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 12:26:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from alln-iport-4.cisco.com (alln-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.142.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 987BA1A8886 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 12:26:40 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1721; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1452630400; x=1453840000; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=EY2vuNjpNvBMY4iicC1P5I7II+lfVJw2XShbGc1m9+c=; b=gcZ+R8S9CZist3TO5HMBPtVvmPk0/F31sncT2I8PI/+271hcJWHjs60+ bmgtwLgcemuamWmV3E/z/+b3SsyG6pSLlK3vvUFcb9ZqZhQHFSy1iaZUB SNiTWRZMqXtbS1bpg6hOTXQJf5/9Hhw14kj3Z4lCW83SUoyqLg4nx+DmE o=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0AaAgAyYJVW/5RdJa1egzpSbQaIU7MlA?= =?us-ascii?q?Q2BZBgKhW0CgS04FAEBAQEBAQGBCoQ0AQEBBAEBATc0CwwEAgEIEQQBAR8JByc?= =?us-ascii?q?LFAkIAgQBDQUIiCYOwAcBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEUBIZWhH+EJhEBh?= =?us-ascii?q?QUFkxCEAwGFQogPgWWEQ4hbjlIBIAEBQoQKcoUCOgGBBwEBAQ?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,285,1449532800"; d="scan'208";a="225841518" Received: from rcdn-core-12.cisco.com ([173.37.93.148]) by alln-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 12 Jan 2016 20:26:39 +0000 Received: from XCH-ALN-013.cisco.com (xch-aln-013.cisco.com [173.36.7.23]) by rcdn-core-12.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u0CKQdrB031330 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 12 Jan 2016 20:26:39 GMT Received: from xch-aln-014.cisco.com (173.36.7.24) by XCH-ALN-013.cisco.com (173.36.7.23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 14:26:38 -0600 Received: from xch-aln-014.cisco.com ([173.36.7.24]) by XCH-ALN-014.cisco.com ([173.36.7.24]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 14:26:38 -0600 From: "Jakob Heitz (jheitz)" To: Martin Vigoureux , "bess@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 Thread-Index: AQHRTE/LmChUfu4AM0ySDz9yWFtWXZ74Vlxw Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 20:26:38 +0000 Message-ID: <10b705709ffb490ba62f80f96639a4c2@XCH-ALN-014.cisco.com> References: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [128.107.166.18] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 20:26:42 -0000 Support. --Jakob > -----Original Message----- > From: BESS [mailto:bess-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Martin Vigoureux > Sent: Monday, January 11, 2016 1:08 AM > To: bess@ietf.org > Cc: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election@tools.ietf.org > Subject: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 >=20 > Hello working group, >=20 > This email starts a two-week poll on adopting > draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 [1] as a working group item. >=20 > Please state on the list if you support adoption or not (in the both > cases, please also state the reasons). >=20 > This poll runs until *the 25th of January*. >=20 > Currently no IPR has been disclosed against this document. >=20 > *Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that > applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in > compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 > and 5378 for more details). >=20 > =3D=3D> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please > respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any > relevant IPR. >=20 > The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from > each author and contributor. >=20 > If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please > explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet > been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. >=20 > Thank you, >=20 > Martin & Thomas > bess chairs >=20 > [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election/ >=20 > _______________________________________________ > BESS mailing list > BESS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess From nobody Tue Jan 12 13:26:45 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietf.org Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D87C11A8984; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 13:26:43 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.11.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20160112212643.30302.19249.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 13:26:43 -0800 Archived-At: Cc: bess@ietf.org Subject: [bess] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-extranet-06.txt X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 21:26:44 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the BGP Enabled Services Working Group of the IETF. Title : Extranet Multicast in BGP/IP MPLS VPNs Authors : Yakov Rekhter Eric C. Rosen Rahul Aggarwal Yiqun Cai Thomas Morin Filename : draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-extranet-06.txt Pages : 61 Date : 2016-01-12 Abstract: Previous RFCs specify the procedures necessary to allow IP multicast traffic to travel from one site to another within a BGP/MPLS IP VPN (Virtual Private Network). However, it is sometimes desirable to allow multicast traffic whose source is in one VPN to be received by systems that are in another VPN. This is known as a "Multicast VPN (MVPN) extranet". This document updates RFCs 6513, 6514, and 6625 by specifying the procedures that are necessary in order to provide MVPN extranet service. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-extranet/ There's also a htmlized version available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-extranet-06 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-extranet-06 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Wed Jan 13 07:16:34 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 977171B2A64; Wed, 13 Jan 2016 07:16:28 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 OVvoTmj-Rib1; Wed, 13 Jan 2016 07:16:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bl2on0141.outbound.protection.outlook.com [65.55.169.141]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C1E841B2E93; Wed, 13 Jan 2016 07:16:23 -0800 (PST) Authentication-Results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=erosen@juniper.net; Received: from [172.29.35.81] (66.129.241.12) by BLUPR0501MB2148.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.164.23.154) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.361.13; Wed, 13 Jan 2016 15:16:18 +0000 To: Susan Hares , 'Benoit Claise' , "'The IESG'" References: <20151217133049.1038.44405.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <56741869.5020505@juniper.net> <00af01d139c6$898fb720$9caf2560$@ndzh.com> <567859EC.6030103@juniper.net> <006101d13ce1$725cd650$571682f0$@ndzh.com> <56799F9F.4010907@juniper.net> <000d01d13d94$80868a10$81939e30$@ndzh.com> From: Eric C Rosen Message-ID: <56966A3D.4000708@juniper.net> Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 10:16:13 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <000d01d13d94$80868a10$81939e30$@ndzh.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------020602030602000305060706" X-Originating-IP: [66.129.241.12] X-ClientProxiedBy: BY2PR08CA0071.namprd08.prod.outlook.com (25.163.62.167) To BLUPR0501MB2148.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (25.164.23.154) X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; BLUPR0501MB2148; 2:SfRM4aStch9yjELSjqwLc1xo51APLMl8DJGQDltva/OnUKdUI+o5FNAv0sIhS7NHWVsfV2IF/5grqLOrpVgbdy0OHKnTd9MpnjLo7RdcAh6dQc6ImNfxzSxlFSTg3HwElnMMPcU2RHoMQyYZAA+K/A==; 3:MsIK/xGGKwxb8OoC5MycphKtM8rlGJV4PG1sFK7za8L7X+TUD1rX2QB2YvyrvE34xRQa9/D5DrzEGhPwd3eu5Zcqc5pSMGXRFiK/3zn6EGUaUtAmfcW4M0mQT1k+R51d; 25:4YdXc8XVcjhZMtFWkv9Fbc69gLNZqLaSPXBSs3LPx2Fm9Bek0rKzFfKdhfw/z4OsEZdPOral2I8Ze5+TyJCc3H5pHIuw2OpvT8ZtnQmRiCx1v0W8MYNT5+DUwPqwFIW1BxfF7FBaQcDaGBfpW5PSqf7FFe0dEzSAwzowXf+xTKhIY1f+X3hkqNrp6ic2pbFLgeuXJnXhfpnmk72ROpWpTfv/G3uhna0qgvvkh+mlr2T57NHo/DABdstKTKYFsYHV X-Microsoft-Antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BLUPR0501MB2148; X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: 3b17e445-a9a7-439d-9bc5-08d31c2c7dfd X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; BLUPR0501MB2148; 20: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; 4:HIlTEi9m9vrEDceTs5yieKh+pmF6V22Al4G/yF0KIUtdduHg9bQURnHwV1D+PKYnDNw7vM0BfCFLnvPQBdmS67xdJv9f+bh6/ave5DyLVi4CwBpcrhE1k73kbGoLK/gHkxi4Fk45iOGyLk8rjoAxR66HD9sIri07wpfM9/atQH3+4QS0AQlCKcbFAeqDT8g4wR7NRugGb6+bMd/wAhR1wQlx/+iSU9qFBXs8C4Hh2fMD0u+LKtFZCgqTzcXGnf00SaJV0DH/iahirfo0rERKeyj7lD7KPBZY6z3CbtuqMgjEP+Dwg2sBtu+OA2We4/bJuHajC791neKZlGfyCSfy+5zUbWIqAE1bPWGZsRNs4Ug6ZLx/vn6spfvdPhyX6pf9 X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-Test: UriScan:; X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(520078)(8121501046)(3002001)(10201501046); SRVR:BLUPR0501MB2148; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BLUPR0501MB2148; X-Forefront-PRVS: 08200063E9 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(6049001)(189002)(199003)(24454002)(479174004)(377454003)(122386002)(4326007)(106356001)(42186005)(5008740100001)(2950100001)(84326002)(105586002)(66066001)(65956001)(77096005)(65806001)(16236675004)(512874002)(6116002)(3846002)(790700001)(2906002)(87266999)(586003)(65816999)(54356999)(1096002)(5001770100001)(81156007)(99136001)(97736004)(19580395003)(80316001)(86362001)(40100003)(50986999)(5004730100002)(93886004)(4001350100001)(5001960100002)(76176999)(83506001)(59896002)(230783001)(101416001)(189998001)(19625215002)(36756003)(92566002)(87976001)(33656002)(64126003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BLUPR0501MB2148; H:[172.29.35.81]; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; Received-SPF: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: =?utf-8?B?MTtCTFVQUjA1MDFNQjIxNDg7MjM6eHhIZldOSUV0ZFRWcFVmaFV5SHhhOEhh?= =?utf-8?B?b2Y3THhTbUdvd0paaVRhZ0FWNDVFZXhKTTZoRlg0TXpoOUFNRUJsQ3gwOVBX?= =?utf-8?B?THp4c1hsMzFnTkRJSzZDOGFvS29tSUthblZtcW43R05zdjMyNytOOGpPZVRP?= =?utf-8?B?RG4wSVZOZG03Nm45dTF5ZVM3enpIMitma0hMUVVuYkduWjRjMmpvNTRGYzVw?= =?utf-8?B?TTFrNnlaTFlMMWlZVjFhYnN2QTJJbHFBc3liWFJsa3grUTNyZ2pDMDdVcVhB?= =?utf-8?B?VWNxc21tdXlHdnlzV25iMnNUL1lBZjh6TG1sTVdiMmVGTkJtMERWdkMraFQ0?= =?utf-8?B?ejlnSjY1SkFMVDFRVzM3b0pJMkZ0OEE5UDl0ZlMxMHNRZDNsUC9DNUQvTG5w?= =?utf-8?B?bTl5dUpSVEdQR291cndSRExINTlhcXR1dGlZa1FNWHJxYms5dWVhMExUUXJv?= =?utf-8?B?RHdLR203YlZoRk0rSVl5SkF1VkFDSW9pQTQwZVJhV1hOMm1VS2hKMmYyMjNn?= =?utf-8?B?VDNqR0RNMTdFdW9tUE5XZE1XcFFya3lWM0RkTi91ZldYVTF2aU5HYWRYc3I2?= =?utf-8?B?Tk56TWRPOThuRFduMVpJRnBVazJBRTBhREg0RjZhTXp2UjNyV1dLVTRiWGpG?= =?utf-8?B?VXMrYkJxa2FVeFNXb1l1L3d2ZFcwNjQzdFBmL1I1eUJRZkh6WnN4a0JndjZH?= =?utf-8?B?S1hmazI1YXFMYTFBSWZaNEZ2NkxIUHQ2dkdsdndRYjBUNmgydkpBMkpWUTRk?= =?utf-8?B?anN6M204TkpXbFQ0L1JuRkdRT3JxUXJVa21RdE5IQlZvSVJoT1hNcnFTNXhm?= =?utf-8?B?K0JGV0JSN0ErYUEwT0kwbm55QlRUeTJ1UDJCK2kyUlpyMzM4MzFqd3lQSVRy?= =?utf-8?B?Ny8wQ1VJVlpqemVrS3l1OGtCRVhiL042Zmh5cVlIdmZNWXorcmpHcDEzZkdy?= =?utf-8?B?Y1lsOGVVNFgyNEt4UldwTmI3bEVFdjE3WWpvYjlmS3M2eDlYUG05UlEvTWVH?= =?utf-8?B?NHQ1ZDZ3ek4rWDhpdlIxNmtDaXpRM1JnVHZlUEY3Nk1QNExObEFNU3JENWFQ?= =?utf-8?B?YVF3N3hVblpZTll0MmhTS0dpMDlPNzYwbkd4QU1XRk1wYUs3ZTM1R3ZOUzhs?= =?utf-8?B?R29GRmxHTytQS2Z6SzdGR3JNYWdKWUtkUW8vMmpuVGhUWnh6azhzYzBFOE1J?= =?utf-8?B?TEdpY3FUVmRDdTZqN2lwdkRvM1NSeEV6ZTR6dGgvYSsrZDZrdGliT21KTUM1?= =?utf-8?B?d0RYdWNZZ05JQ2lJYTdzWU14VmJZc2pzQ1B6ejFRbGpjU1F4VzJ5Qjl0RGhT?= =?utf-8?B?RlFJdldQWjBxbHZwMndMY0xpOUV2MHcwaWtEQXRFUW55UWpGNXFSbXNEZmV5?= =?utf-8?B?dm1yWDRlcE4vcm93eldjQ2htSTVEK043OEZYanJLK1R3NFNYcnIxR05GK0s4?= =?utf-8?B?K2Ruc2JSQVdna2ozb1IyaW9EZnlUTjkxZ0RoTGNzMlB3dTVFRE1vbENseGR3?= =?utf-8?B?elN0c1lXRlAvR1Y4ZXpxZ3NsREJ3ZjMyRmhOZitQYVNxalgzQVFZa1FvVFZj?= =?utf-8?B?NmE2alg1VHB2cDNQQlRCQVZ4Zm9HT0ZCYzRiMmE0dTZSdFVVMzNtT3A5SUJw?= =?utf-8?B?Mk1WSHAxRHcwckh6blFPbWNuOW9LL0VhNm1kU1Z5QzcyR0NnUFBERFVFbzEv?= =?utf-8?B?bXhBTkZMWVkvZ0ZrVkFza0VweGFDK1d2VTlQUlQ5emFWQllNRlJlSEVldkk1?= =?utf-8?B?OHFnRThQN0dRK0ZGSzEwZnU3Rm8waktmU0UwV1BTZ1NJOWVhSDU1Z2FHN0hJ?= =?utf-8?B?VnhTdHJzazBsdjRQSFJVNHNmUzZRN2dMbkI3YzRlTXBENGRnTllxR3pxaisy?= =?utf-8?Q?/G6FlQNukaOWN2ZlQ409ESWdOK2YFwpUvx?= X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; BLUPR0501MB2148; 5:mkKec2bxNYFKFmWRxxOPNxnHMm5PUnUd+lUex/AslVpvr4FJ6U5PjFulhjnbRGFiS9EnJ+m7R3YhmwNgUuvt/z56e4CONcEsl7JnPvil9WsT7dQHANceeFLiM9fdJp7vIk9sQhXEAhMIWSx0U+RF3Q==; 24:KYZFIsfPoih/hlrbYRcFhYQnwkC0pwAT1PQx4TbO2olXJuNzNiLEI3NCxMT8/ck5ka2BsoQlXbwmTD24OkcdxSw/H4qvzPxTLj3tWpEuzvI= X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Jan 2016 15:16:18.5563 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BLUPR0501MB2148 Archived-At: Cc: draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-extranet@ietf.org, aretana@cisco.com, "'John G. Scudder'" , bess-chairs@ietf.org, martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com, bess@ietf.org Subject: Re: [bess] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-extranet-04: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 15:16:28 -0000 --------------020602030602000305060706 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On to version -06 ... On 12/23/2015 10:13 AM, Susan Hares wrote: > > Sections which must be added to clear my concerns > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > *4.4.1 Extranet Source Extended Community * > > To facilitate this, we define a new Transitive Opaque Extended > Community, the "Extranet Source" Extended Community. > > The value field of this extended community is all zeros. > > *Restrictions: *This value field MUST be set to zero upon > origination, MUST be ignored upon reception and MUST be passed > unchanged by intermediate routers. > > *Additional Restrictions: *A Route Reflector MUST NOT add/remove the > Extranet Source Extended Community from the VPN-IP routes reflected > by the Route Reflector, including the case where VPN-IP routes > received via IBGP are reflected to EBGP peers (inter-AS option (c), > see [RFC6513] Section 10). > The draft has the following text in section 4.4.1 ("The Extranet Source Extended Community"): "The value field of the Extended Community MUST be set to zero. " "A PE router that interprets this Extended Community MUST ignore the contents of the value field." and the following text in section 4.4.2 ("Distribution of Extranet Source Extended Community"): "A Route Reflector MUST NOT add or remove the Extranet Source Extended Community from the VPN-IP routes reflected by the Route Reflector, including the case where VPN-IP routes received via IBGP are reflected to EBGP peers (inter-AS option (c), see [RFC6513] Section 10). The value of the Extended Community MUST NOT be changed by the route reflector." "When re-advertising VPN-IP routes, ASBRs MUST NOT add/remove the Extranet Source Extended Community from these routes. This includes inter-AS options (b) and (c) (see [RFC6513] Section 10). The value of the Extended Community MUST NOT be changed by the ASBRs." It seems to me that this contains the information you have requested. It may not be in the format you prefer, but I think it goes beyond the scope of an ops-dir review (or an IESG Discuss) to demand format changes. > > *4.4.2 Extranet Separation Extended community * > > ** > > We define a new Transitive Opaque Extended Community, the "Extranet > Separation" Extended Community. This Extended Community is used only > when extranet separation is being used. > > *Restrictions:* Its value field MUST be set to zero upon origination, > MUST be ignored upon reception, and MUST be > > passed unchanged by intermediate routers. > > * Restrictions on Adding/deleting this community:* ?? (Eric – > please add something here). > The draft now contains the following text in section 4.5 ("The Extranet Separation Extended Community"): "We define a new Transitive Opaque Extended Community, the "Extranet Separation" Extended Community (see [RFC4360], [RFC7153], and Section 9 of this document). This Extended Community is used only when extranet separation is being used. Its value field MUST be set to zero upon origination, MUST be ignored upon reception, and MUST be passed unchanged by intermediate routers. A Route Reflector MUST NOT add or remove the Extranet Separation Extended Community from the routes it reflects, including the case where routes received via IBGP are reflected to EBGP peers (inter-AS option (c), see [RFC6513] Section 10)." It seems to me that this contains the information you have requested. > *Comments that could be put in a Security section: * > > ** > > Whenever a VPN is provisioned, there is a risk that provisioning > errors will result in an unintended cross-connection of VPNs, which > would create a security problem for the customers. Extranet can be > particularly tricky, as it intentionally cross-connects VPNs, but in a > manner that is intended to be strictly limited by policy. > The Security Considerations section already contains the following text: "As is the case with any application of technology based upon [RFC4364], misconfiguration of the RTs may result in VPN security violations (i.e., may result in a packet being delivered to a VPN where, according to policy, it is not supposed to go)." I don't think the above requested text really adds anything, it's just saying the same thing over again. > > If one is connecting two VPNs that have overlapping address spaces, > one has to be sure that the inter-VPN traffic isn't to/from the part > of the address space that is in the overlap. The draft discusses a > lot of the corner cases, and a lot of the scenarios in which things > can go wrong. > The difficulty of dealing with overlapping address spaces when connecting two VPNs is already discussed extensively throughout the document. I don't see that the requested paragraph adds anything of substance. --------------020602030602000305060706 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On to version -06 ...

On 12/23/2015 10:13 AM, Susan Hares wrote:

Sections which must be added to clear my concerns

----------------------------------------------------------------

 

4.4.1 Extranet Source Extended Community

 

   To facilitate this, we define a new Transitive Opaque Extended  Community, the "Extranet Source" Extended Community.

   The value field of this extended community is all zeros.   

 

Restrictions: This value field MUST be set  to zero upon origination,  MUST be ignored upon reception and MUST  be passed unchanged by intermediate routers. 

 

 Additional Restrictions:  A Route Reflector MUST NOT add/remove the Extranet Source Extended  Community from the VPN-IP routes reflected by  the Route Reflector,  including the case where VPN-IP routes received via IBGP are reflected to EBGP peers (inter-AS option (c), see [RFC6513]   Section 10).


The draft has the following text in section 4.4.1 ("The Extranet Source Extended Community"):

   "The value field of the Extended Community MUST be set to zero. "

  "A PE router that interprets this Extended Community MUST ignore the contents of the value field."

and the following text in section 4.4.2 ("Distribution of Extranet Source Extended Community"):

   "A Route Reflector MUST NOT add or remove the Extranet Source Extended Community from the VPN-IP routes reflected by the Route Reflector, including the case where VPN-IP routes received via IBGP are reflected to EBGP peers (inter-AS option (c), see [RFC6513] Section 10).  The value of the Extended Community MUST NOT be changed by the route reflector."

   "When re-advertising VPN-IP routes, ASBRs MUST NOT add/remove the Extranet Source Extended Community from these routes.  This includes inter-AS options (b) and (c) (see [RFC6513] Section 10).  The value of the Extended Community MUST NOT be changed by the ASBRs."

It seems to me that this contains the information you have requested.  It may not be in the format you prefer, but I think it goes beyond the scope of an ops-dir review (or an IESG Discuss) to demand format changes.

 

4.4.2 Extranet Separation Extended community

 

We define a new Transitive Opaque Extended Community, the "Extranet  Separation" Extended Community.  This Extended Community is used only  when extranet separation is being used. 

 

   Restrictions:  Its value field MUST be set to zero upon origination, MUST be ignored upon reception, and MUST be

   passed unchanged by intermediate routers.

 

  Restrictions on Adding/deleting this community:  ??  (Eric – please add something here).

The draft now contains the following text in section 4.5 ("The Extranet Separation Extended Community"):

   "We define a new Transitive Opaque Extended Community, the "Extranet Separation" Extended Community (see [RFC4360], [RFC7153], and Section 9 of this document).  This Extended Community is used only when extranet separation is being used.  Its value field MUST be set to zero upon origination, MUST be ignored upon reception, and MUST be passed unchanged by intermediate routers.  A Route Reflector MUST NOT add or remove the Extranet Separation Extended Community from the routes it reflects, including the case where routes received via IBGP are reflected to EBGP peers (inter-AS option (c), see [RFC6513] Section 10)."

It seems to me that this contains the information you have requested.

Comments that could be put in a Security section:

 

Whenever a VPN is provisioned, there is a risk that provisioning errors will result in an unintended cross-connection of VPNs, which would create a security problem for the customers.  Extranet can be particularly tricky, as it intentionally cross-connects VPNs, but in a manner that is intended to be strictly limited by policy.

The Security Considerations section already contains the following text:

 "As is the case with any application of technology based upon [RFC4364], misconfiguration of the RTs may result in VPN security violations (i.e., may result in a packet being delivered to a VPN where, according to policy, it is not supposed to go)."

I don't think the above requested text really adds anything, it's just saying the same thing over again.

If one is connecting two VPNs that have overlapping address spaces, one has to be sure that the inter-VPN traffic isn't to/from the part of the address space that is in the overlap.  The draft discusses a lot of the corner cases, and a lot of the scenarios in which things can go wrong.  

 

The difficulty of dealing with overlapping address spaces when connecting two VPNs is already discussed extensively throughout the document.  I don't see that the requested paragraph adds anything of substance.

--------------020602030602000305060706-- From nobody Wed Jan 13 10:11:42 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F2051A00D4; Wed, 13 Jan 2016 10:11:41 -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 J8e9vlBNAMwl; Wed, 13 Jan 2016 10:11:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1bon0752.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::1:752]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3C1FB1B304A; Wed, 13 Jan 2016 10:11:38 -0800 (PST) Authentication-Results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=erosen@juniper.net; Received: from [172.29.35.81] (66.129.241.12) by SN1PR0501MB2158.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.163.229.152) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.361.13; Wed, 13 Jan 2016 18:11:14 +0000 To: , BESS , From: Eric C Rosen Message-ID: <5696933E.1080802@juniper.net> Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 13:11:10 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [66.129.241.12] X-ClientProxiedBy: CO1PR06CA055.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.242.160.45) To SN1PR0501MB2158.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (25.163.229.152) X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; SN1PR0501MB2158; 2:6eBOpkqm+/nvNfRF+VLk4KLu+Wn+oO7krTpp3casaGE3GxmIaffsiCPGIhQMOXIQ3tCWUFjf8GqW8SffAi3xlA4f50JwnOD3grPn71k7EuFUHJubcl9zYx+9ae42bKiNgT0O8K+VLAgcnG7/RqdmQw==; 3:bz5azzoBVIUc+VQW3JUz3r8FkzWHY2Wqrb7pjoD+p9g0pkbra8MNsPCf4l+7gpADv+0iQd5qZDJhEgEWcnhXwTF4y0gtsbf32+nt2JOa/mnYq6RzuJlEpV+IOln2fbPz; 25:fjZsqujxso2GTCd0AU+D6sF+IBNeBABfRPl0Tj8z71bi5l9hdCj+DhsCSFrH9MYpWorLUe0aOLw9RnIbrRxeEQn4h0RuW8F+LQVVqlVI7/MF6HzN/xvHRrq/iBssEtVB3Lg/QWbNg+exziZWP8WtvvwPsrMHmHIcdNmupo6UM1Raq8qxqMQA2ZEIAJmha3DyGzHcQoCy65apeNON2uKXwae6gx4JU05p7h3flWM43680csKrvNgmGtq0Blr3UjK1 X-Microsoft-Antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:SN1PR0501MB2158; X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: bed98c45-7f61-417c-1837-08d31c44ed88 X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; SN1PR0501MB2158; 20:jZ5o8sPTpWWkTiySBxRPn5uCLoZgQwuajTVVYWG4c1koHIFRV+SA4Z7Ue+6nDoalVZ5dzZ/iJiuhUQ6fmS+D3OYrH8kR7YK4BZ4VQb8cTD8G2mXcgmBSx28mlfSQGUPYcypiflE0bWo+/6yK/fPQ4HxkTt/WyjYlN4C+H37yFid7Ojby/bwuos8ewkg3zriXIsy3CMo68ifbWuSb1PRnvCXXU5O8cGfRvX0OlD9Z4s6PGIOmj/EGUAKQA2yZs/s90/TD7OI6mTx1ktibfADO7WiUrcsALqIr4p7EOdefUMQXA3m6SSUoALOKz3JLL/cHVqJ0DZ3zFR1cJ7pyo71MqiBHpyAKdMar/ersFbWbHTqiVxpzrhEaw1IrgG8K5MZHc1PmYrlUzeXke7A6sBMnddxkI4kMkJjDDuJYCOSWV4WBWWHRLn/xhRutLYrES43j83xMQrktdNQzm68/Nc2Wcio8K8ygviN0J3EIk1FvcbWteCTnF7rCSl3zOROJR+c4; 4:fWSJnEEs5u6dkW325/eKMAsTPymCGF6FMX5pY8ihnpNU9AFUXNMbg767WG+tNM9IDETHqdAIr3lGCqCX8AI1rVVJvg0EW9NhS9SJFXh57AElVxLyGn1gTxOlHL9UPeseLMibwm92Dwj9mcBmpC+6AWG8AZHCv5WyXugm4TC+nV1D1mgj9uuSkfnK1Vaiu0Y/VaDmQa61u2WxCk76VuuqM7y/y5vk1t/OC4WY+AVkAZBamKDs9jKkKYkU0i8EM4y08536XRu9/ADI7EDpCV6ARrFBvfevEqmoVlVBPI+RfNatzZ9NYsHmm+F/TDKzWrC+femzqvvBY7YFw9cp8o8K6MiEfDCwsMr67NR7UwqLrSL2YcPco/MEikKc/h+otQDT X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-Test: UriScan:; X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(520078)(8121501046)(3002001)(10201501046); SRVR:SN1PR0501MB2158; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:SN1PR0501MB2158; X-Forefront-PRVS: 08200063E9 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(6049001)(199003)(164054003)(189002)(50466002)(23676002)(229853001)(77096005)(230783001)(83506001)(86362001)(97736004)(80316001)(4001350100001)(81156007)(59896002)(87976001)(65816999)(5001960100002)(42186005)(101416001)(107886002)(230700001)(40100003)(5001770100001)(122386002)(87266999)(106356001)(50986999)(105586002)(54356999)(64126003)(2906002)(36756003)(99136001)(33656002)(92566002)(189998001)(6116002)(450100001)(3846002)(1096002)(586003)(5008740100001)(47776003)(5004730100002)(65806001)(65956001)(66066001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:SN1PR0501MB2158; H:[172.29.35.81]; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; Received-SPF: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: =?utf-8?B?MTtTTjFQUjA1MDFNQjIxNTg7MjM6V2VqVlpNNW9CVHZuK0lYcjZRVXlYNE9E?= =?utf-8?B?MFNtWTFqbHV4VUhqLzRTaTNvZm9SQUUzdW5ObkdveVdQdjhmYkdOdzZ5dEsv?= =?utf-8?B?VEZxb0FUeTJhOHg5QnNHK2diZGdwOFhoK3F5c1VLeTdlR2RTZVZXQlNuTlcx?= =?utf-8?B?TWNKM3pyRGMySWhFRGg1MUxWNzlCT05TOHgxZlN6VjFweldqU0FrL1FpVjZ3?= =?utf-8?B?cVpTR3FXekdCVHh6SDBCV2tpVGg3TmlmSHZFcDZNQ1pjVythNnVoTlBCeTFH?= =?utf-8?B?YXBpRnd4RW1ualN1dmhDWG9qNWVRZ2lUTWFZbCtOL2JsNjJpWXJZejBZdHIy?= =?utf-8?B?S2ZNSGVrYkpDcGRRRHE0Sm81SWozZ2lTa2creFVhdDd0T2ZUUDdQOXBVaTBS?= =?utf-8?B?eHJqQmF6Y3VjWEVqcWh1NVRSWXRIR0F0WkJiS2xFbGZYMlpFMTUyODBscGlK?= =?utf-8?B?N3BObnBEZFJkZG5JVDMyVHA3TUZKaXVlRlZQMWlFVyszQkxGOVBoQURnZ2VS?= =?utf-8?B?WURiM1l6K1B3eVZwSW0reVl4Z25YWSs4aW11TkJaTmVyc1pUbXpPcnZVa1A2?= =?utf-8?B?RWFTS3owbjZjMUtvVjZBeEEzWnRxeUNBcUNOMmRFV0x3S0tuQWRvajhickNm?= =?utf-8?B?WWJPS20xZjUycTYzYnNjWFh2N1Q2czlCZjBOOFMxTENodld1YnNPcXNicldK?= =?utf-8?B?WFpjZkZhM3h4bS9yeXdOK09PVVI1VGJXaVV5QXpVTVRzVkcwd3hCRk16VTkw?= =?utf-8?B?MWNHd3ltcDBDZmVvYmpzVS9VMTJMUmtDTnZVT0NMdjdQSG8zeVU4ZEVUaEd2?= =?utf-8?B?bXVkN3BNZkFCT2hGaC80b0lscEEwckRqMDBnQXJGdzR5aFZ4VXU4SWltMTdX?= =?utf-8?B?UllFeGJmTndlcmZWTUtreDZBQjV4bUlBLzE4MDZIMDl6ZUhRWTlRNGc0Q0Q5?= =?utf-8?B?Z0R2UU9rcEdKTGxuNXpHSENhVXluTEtLdVo3dThUWWRNS0dUcGtnMkhBRXp1?= =?utf-8?B?RWw1YWFVSmlUWTZ6VU9BSVNvbXRMY3JxdVc2SGg4aW40NGIyejdjVWtaaTlS?= =?utf-8?B?bkwzVmxZd0tmcHJaaUVxemNRdzFzKzdWQWxJZ0JKQzZuVWp2NzliNVg4V0Z1?= =?utf-8?B?TnBjb2JsTCtDVG5oT1Y2L0VDanZjYXU4NkxuV2JZbnRZVzZSQlk2REgxMlhG?= =?utf-8?B?K3g4V2ZtMzdpek85WG0wRTZNYnVkUk1HRE0vaVNkbzZWRmdzdVlEbWszMHgv?= =?utf-8?B?akxmdit4MERjUHgxTHo1Z3pZdjQzOUZnZmlZRVpNalhSM2NKYUFpY2VQY2dG?= =?utf-8?B?UzZQMEx6TkNLbHZoekw4d05JY3JHR0FaNmlzR2ZKRS9Ldm13Wm5YUkRoQkRY?= =?utf-8?B?NnJVUWNwME5kSnQyVFh0eEx2NXJpZUlQSGROZkl4SlF6R25NcTVIZ3JjZzlB?= =?utf-8?B?N0RXMzVBSHl3aUp4dm1BNlZFemhTa3F6a0UvNUR4QVFldlk0UTRybmwycUx6?= =?utf-8?B?Qmk2emc2NzgyMXBkK1dmL3VDTDFZa25LdGFSajIrM0lScEhsK21KVVUyYnVv?= =?utf-8?B?Q2ZZNEk2MFRZVUk4NjJ0eXNuS1RzSE96OWNRSGxxRHZZaFRaU3hSSXl1NllJ?= =?utf-8?B?NkRyYXNyUXdadDluTXZnTjBKUjg2RzByUFFWa3crNnVZc2FqS0NLeVp0NDkw?= =?utf-8?Q?l9NPAijcn/FNvrjuIXvHBl9nOQ8Zo45A7+cEwBaSF?= X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; SN1PR0501MB2158; 5:LVDsseTPAGOWs9d9oYG9CKsP087XoSE5yt8u/GX1zS91TxjZ3N8AtvGRBlVA8+4Ko2KGnyXl5ejuCf2c7M212jnc905PKrsxGJkA5zbfx54la9xHGsiUik+ZFC6wZHJ4DSrnAWSx0MqOGuRoq6xpcA==; 24:dAtz/XlEGncAeTjrirdHD1paT+/Js8T78rZ0DgsOsSof+B2bbm4mit+2WRxUZ7uy59pbUZLLtBOkZT5TR4s44/CZtJJS0SHRg1Neh30Hu/8= X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Jan 2016 18:11:14.8469 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SN1PR0501MB2158 Archived-At: Subject: [bess] draft-rosen-idr-rfc3107bis-00 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 18:11:41 -0000 Folks, Pardon the cross-post, but I think this may be of interest to all three of the IDR, MPLS, and BESS WGs. I've posted draft-rosen-idr-rfc3107bis-00 ("Using BGP to Bind MPLS Labels to Address Prefixes"), which is intended of course to obsolete RFC 3107 ("Carrying Label Information in BGP"). (While I put "idr" in the name of the draft, it's not completely obvious which WG should own this draft (assuming it progresses)). The purpose of this draft is the following: - It fixes a number of errors in RFC3107. It attempts to do so in a way that is compatible with existing implementations. - It removes the material about "Advertising Multiple Routes to a Destination". This is a feature that was never implemented as specified, and the text about it just causes confusion. The functionality that this feature was intended to provide can now be better provided by using add-paths; this is discussed in the draft. - It is explicit about its applicability to SAFI 128 as well as to SAFI 4. - It clarifies the procedures for withdrawing and replacing label bindings. - It discusses the relationship between SAFI-1 routes and SAFI-4 routes, which is very unclear in RFC3107. Different implementations have treated the SAFI-1/SAFI-4 interactions differently, and the draft discusses these differences. However, as the draft is not intended to favor any one implementation over another, it can't do much more than point out some of the differences among implementations. - RFC 3107 provides an encoding that allows BGP to assign multiple labels (i.e., a label stack) to a given prefix. However, it provides no semantics for this, and this feature has been only rarely implemented. In fact, it is believed that some implementations will not parse the Updates correctly if they encode multiple labels in the NLRI. Therefore the draft only allows a label stack to be assigned to a given prefix if a new Capability has been exchanged. It also discusses the semantics of assigning a label stack, and gives some examples of how this might be used. I hope that those of you who are interested in this topic will provide your comments. I've tried to make the draft compatible with existing implementations and deployments, so if anyone sees anything that negatively impacts an existing implementation, please comment on that. I also removed most of the text that explains why it is a good idea to use BGP to distribute label bindings. That text was important in the '90s, but now seems rather out of date. However, I would welcome comments on whether an updated "motivation/positioning" section should be added. Thanks, Eric From nobody Thu Jan 14 07:18:42 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98FA11B356B; Thu, 14 Jan 2016 07:18:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=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 d1_xgDGCiWUN; Thu, 14 Jan 2016 07:18:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from relais-inet.francetelecom.com (relais-ias92.francetelecom.com [193.251.215.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 408BB1B3570; Thu, 14 Jan 2016 07:18:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from omfedm07.si.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.3]) by omfedm10.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id B6F4C2642F5; Thu, 14 Jan 2016 16:18:34 +0100 (CET) Received: from Exchangemail-eme2.itn.ftgroup (unknown [10.114.31.57]) by omfedm07.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 914E14C074; Thu, 14 Jan 2016 16:18:34 +0100 (CET) Received: from OPEXCLILM21.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::e92a:c932:907e:8f06]) by OPEXCLILM23.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::787e:db0c:23c4:71b3%19]) with mapi id 14.03.0279.002; Thu, 14 Jan 2016 16:18:34 +0100 From: To: Eric C Rosen Thread-Topic: [bess] draft-rosen-idr-rfc3107bis-00 Thread-Index: AQHRTi3fSdezVI1uUky3rzngjkewoJ76y2xw Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 15:18:33 +0000 Message-ID: <20421_1452784714_5697BC4A_20421_2179_1_53C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A0F791AE7@OPEXCLILM21.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> References: <5696933E.1080802@juniper.net> In-Reply-To: <5696933E.1080802@juniper.net> Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US Content-Language: fr-FR X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.168.234.3] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-PMX-Version: 6.2.1.2478543, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2016.1.14.150317 Archived-At: Cc: "idr@ietf.org" , BESS , "mpls@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [bess] draft-rosen-idr-rfc3107bis-00 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 15:18:41 -0000 Hi Eric, Thanks for the draft. I read it and it looks good and useful to me. I have mostly 1 comment: > - RFC 3107 provides an encoding that allows BGP to assign multiple labels Upfront, the current issue is that implementations, which claim compliance = with RFC 3107, are just non-compliant. So the draft is proposing to change = the specification to make such implementations compliant, while another opt= ion would be to fix implementation (to be compliant with the RFC they claim= to support). I don't really expect that we'll agree on it, but I had to make the comment= nonetheless. ;-) That being said, The proposed capability is a good idea to improve interoperability. Thanks. The main issue I have, is that this draft is not backward compatible with R= FC 3107 (as a RFC 3107 speaker will never notice that its peer has not send= the new capability, and may still send multiple labels). Plus in case of e= rror due to this incompatibility, the error handling behavior is likely to = be "BGP session shutdown" (as the NLRI "cannot" be correctly parsed) which = is disruptive. Plus the implementation A not supporting multiple labels, wi= ll claim that the implementation B supporting multiple labels is "not compl= iant" with rfc3107bis, while I would rather argue that this is implementati= on A which is not compliant with RFC 3107. I'd propose one change: - Capability means: I don't support receiving multiple labels, hence you SH= OULD not send that to me. - Even if the capability is not advertised by both peers, and hence a singl= e label is expected, all implementations MUST check that the "S" bit (in th= is first label) is set to 1. If the bit is cleared, the Prefix MUST be iden= tified as per RFC 3107/this document and treated as withdraw as defined in = RFC 7606. This means more work for rfc3107bis speakers, but we can't ask existing spe= akers to do the job. Especially since they were compliant with RFC 3107. Alternatively, the capability could be extended to carry two meanings: I su= pport rfc3107bis, I support multiple labels. This would allow a rfc3107bis = speaker to refuse the BGP connection with RFC 3107 speakers. But this is mu= ch less convenient. Plus very minor comments - From an editorial standpoint, I'd personally favor removing =A72.2 and sa= ying in 2.3(or elsewhere) that if the capability is not exchanged, a single= label may be encoded. (IMHO duplicating the text is less easy to read and = more error prone. And I believe this would be enough to address your point). - In Figure 2 (=A72.3), 2 labels are indicated. Do you think there is a nee= d to indicate which one is the first (Label 1) and which one is the k th (L= abel k). Indeed, the order of the labels is significant when the router wil= l need to push them in the dataplane. Or a sentence could be added to make = this explicit. - In =A74, there is a possible case which is not described: S1 receives L11, L12,... L1k S1 sends L21, L12,... L1k S1 programs in the data plane: L21 swap L11 Compared to sending a single label (L21), S1 avoids having to push k labels= in its dataplane, which it may be incapable of. - In =A74 "While this may be useful in certain scenarios, it may provide unintended r= esults in other scenarios." I fail to see when this can be useful as N1 or = downstream LSR will receive packets with labels there are not aware of (L22= ...L2k). Out of curiosity, I'm be curious to know the useful scenario that = you have in mind. - in =A75 " It is possible that a BGP speaker will receive both a SAFI-1 ro= ute for prefix P and a SAFI-4 route for prefix P. The significance of this is a matter of local policy." For 6PE (rfc4798), may be this should not be a local policy but be specifie= d as a priori SAFI-1 and SAFI-4 prefix should be comparable. Ideally rfc479= 8 could have specified this but I haven't check if it's done. Alternatively= =A75 could reference this case. (Same point for propagation between SAFI-1 and SAFI-4) Thanks again for the draft, Regards, -- Bruno > From: BESS [mailto:bess-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Eric C Rosen > Subject: [bess] draft-rosen-idr-rfc3107bis-00 >=20 > Folks, >=20 > Pardon the cross-post, but I think this may be of interest to all three > of the IDR, MPLS, and BESS WGs. >=20 > I've posted draft-rosen-idr-rfc3107bis-00 ("Using BGP to Bind MPLS > Labels to Address Prefixes"), which is intended of course to obsolete > RFC 3107 ("Carrying Label Information in BGP"). (While I put "idr" in > the name of the draft, it's not completely obvious which WG should own > this draft (assuming it progresses)). >=20 > The purpose of this draft is the following: >=20 > - It fixes a number of errors in RFC3107. It attempts to do so in a way > that is compatible with existing implementations. >=20 > - It removes the material about "Advertising Multiple Routes to a > Destination". This is a feature that was never implemented as > specified, and the text about it just causes confusion. The > functionality that this feature was intended to provide can now be > better provided by using add-paths; this is discussed in the draft. >=20 > - It is explicit about its applicability to SAFI 128 as well as to SAFI 4. >=20 > - It clarifies the procedures for withdrawing and replacing label binding= s. >=20 > - It discusses the relationship between SAFI-1 routes and SAFI-4 routes, > which is very unclear in RFC3107. Different implementations have > treated the SAFI-1/SAFI-4 interactions differently, and the draft > discusses these differences. However, as the draft is not intended to > favor any one implementation over another, it can't do much more than > point out some of the differences among implementations. >=20 > - RFC 3107 provides an encoding that allows BGP to assign multiple > labels (i.e., a label stack) to a given prefix. However, it provides no > semantics for this, and this feature has been only rarely implemented. > In fact, it is believed that some implementations will not parse the > Updates correctly if they encode multiple labels in the NLRI. Therefore > the draft only allows a label stack to be assigned to a given prefix if > a new Capability has been exchanged. It also discusses the semantics of > assigning a label stack, and gives some examples of how this might be use= d. >=20 > I hope that those of you who are interested in this topic will provide > your comments. I've tried to make the draft compatible with existing > implementations and deployments, so if anyone sees anything that > negatively impacts an existing implementation, please comment on that. >=20 > I also removed most of the text that explains why it is a good idea to > use BGP to distribute label bindings. That text was important in the > '90s, but now seems rather out of date. However, I would welcome > comments on whether an updated "motivation/positioning" section should > be added. >=20 > Thanks, >=20 > Eric >=20 > _______________________________________________ > BESS mailing list > BESS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess ___________________________________________________________________________= ______________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confiden= tielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu= ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages el= ectroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou = falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged inf= ormation that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and dele= te this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been = modified, changed or falsified. Thank you. From nobody Thu Jan 14 09:04:46 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BA681A1DBD for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2016 09:04:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.502 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.502 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, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 yehKGskCtpni for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2016 09:04:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from alln-iport-6.cisco.com (alln-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.142.93]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B89DF1A1C06 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2016 09:04:43 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1540; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1452791083; x=1454000683; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=Knmg9gnuc+vF0CFB0T8pSqeNASvkkL/meW3FB3Xwoyc=; b=NJBZiJf5b3HQg01gpUcQRQSXkiHGreLYOYCIku+k9bquKjvKny05VeG2 5pq1tsPqeXEg/X7MC5TsIAwxciMpeRXf6JLMz9MOt/BZlMSuE49ivsRqm 2ABBiRRvjeSlJFibBmdaNBgEsWJhqL1LbC4fFmzdZxS9fDunp5u5awFtD I=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0AYAgCH1JdW/4MNJK1egzpSbQaIVbMYA?= =?us-ascii?q?Q2BZBgKhW0CgTs4FAEBAQEBAQGBCoQ1AQEEAQEBawsQAgEIRicLJQIEAQ0FiC4?= =?us-ascii?q?OwEQBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEUBIZWhH+EJhEBhQUBBJcWAYVDiBeBX?= =?us-ascii?q?oREiF+OWAEgAQFChApyhG86gQgBAQE?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,295,1449532800"; d="scan'208";a="227343868" Received: from alln-core-1.cisco.com ([173.36.13.131]) by alln-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 14 Jan 2016 17:04:42 +0000 Received: from XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com (xch-rtp-015.cisco.com [64.101.220.155]) by alln-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u0EH4gUl011421 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 14 Jan 2016 17:04:42 GMT Received: from xch-rtp-012.cisco.com (64.101.220.152) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Thu, 14 Jan 2016 12:04:42 -0500 Received: from xch-rtp-012.cisco.com ([64.101.220.152]) by XCH-RTP-012.cisco.com ([64.101.220.152]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Thu, 14 Jan 2016 12:04:41 -0500 From: "Satya Mohanty (satyamoh)" To: Martin Vigoureux , "bess@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 Thread-Index: AQHRTE+oMANq2h3B1UWRrEvV7UJlLp77EGaA Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 17:04:41 +0000 Message-ID: References: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.24.113.98] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 17:04:45 -0000 I=B9m not aware of any IPR related to the draft. Thanks, =8BSatya On 1/11/16, 1:07 AM, "BESS on behalf of Martin Vigoureux" wrote: >Hello working group, > >This email starts a two-week poll on adopting >draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 [1] as a working group item. > >Please state on the list if you support adoption or not (in the both >cases, please also state the reasons). > >This poll runs until *the 25th of January*. > >Currently no IPR has been disclosed against this document. > >*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that >applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in >compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 >and 5378 for more details). > >=3D=3D> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please >respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any >relevant IPR. > >The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from >each author and contributor. > >If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please >explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet >been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. > >Thank you, > >Martin & Thomas >bess chairs > >[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election/ > >_______________________________________________ >BESS mailing list >BESS@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess From nobody Thu Jan 14 19:22:07 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8CD51A88ED for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2016 19:22:06 -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 vEWyoXEI36sF for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2016 19:22:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1on0784.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::784]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 962991A88E8 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2016 19:22:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from DM2PR05MB287.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.101.27) by DM2PR05MB288.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.101.11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.361.13; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 03:21:46 +0000 Received: from DM2PR05MB287.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.101.27]) by DM2PR05MB287.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.101.27]) with mapi id 15.01.0361.006; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 03:21:46 +0000 From: Kishore Tiruveedhula To: "Satya Mohanty (satyamoh)" , Martin Vigoureux , "bess@ietf.org" , "draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election@tools.ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 Thread-Index: AQHRTE+x9Ebeofjrt0681tnJjQnBZ577QrGAgABYlIA= Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 03:21:45 +0000 Message-ID: References: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.5.9.151119 authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=kishoret@juniper.net; x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.11] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; DM2PR05MB288; 5:EfYpk3M7VgMOYkLK4y694DTKuik5iSr2J/gL/9yJy/U/g3nW+SQK0DVEyoYQn8AERoh6MtMoCIXXIzJyVkmDlXmsu6vw6s1YfqWIciQQ7+NuZlo7dkfjGN8k5VucQ0FstBUC9NfftpjVEldB2CAsRg==; 24:Yk4VNLR1C1nO+0iZNBZ5VOhVOI+c4AtnhOMnZGT3YS9iaIucbIH2ztbBCNol5vyRUVpOYtCHu8qUmXyX7N72wRE9Eo650Ogv0XP9TiBRRP4= x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:DM2PR05MB288; x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 8177cc36-6c68-4922-d174-08d31d5aff9c x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(61489475475257); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(520078)(8121501046)(3002001)(10201501046); SRVR:DM2PR05MB288; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DM2PR05MB288; x-forefront-prvs: 08220FA8D6 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(164054003)(377454003)(189002)(479174004)(24454002)(199003)(86362001)(5002640100001)(66066001)(76176999)(5001960100002)(54356999)(1220700001)(102836003)(36756003)(1096002)(106116001)(11100500001)(19580405001)(2201001)(2900100001)(92566002)(101416001)(97736004)(5004730100002)(5001770100001)(2501003)(2906002)(189998001)(50986999)(3846002)(107886002)(586003)(6116002)(2950100001)(4001350100001)(40100003)(5008740100001)(19580395003)(122556002)(83506001)(106356001)(230783001)(99286002)(105586002)(87936001)(15975445007)(77096005)(10400500002)(81156007); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DM2PR05MB288; H:DM2PR05MB287.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <58AD82C169F2A0499D5C7F50E59C0059@namprd05.prod.outlook.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 15 Jan 2016 03:21:45.4601 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM2PR05MB288 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 03:22:06 -0000 I support this draft. It improves the stability with the better DF election algorithm. Thanks, Kishore > >On 1/11/16, 1:07 AM, "BESS on behalf of Martin Vigoureux" > >wrote: > >>Hello working group, >> >>This email starts a two-week poll on adopting >>draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 [1] as a working group item. >> >>Please state on the list if you support adoption or not (in the both >>cases, please also state the reasons). >> >>This poll runs until *the 25th of January*. >> >>Currently no IPR has been disclosed against this document. >> >>*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that >>applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in >>compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 >>and 5378 for more details). >> >>=3D=3D> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please >>respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any >>relevant IPR. >> >>The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from >>each author and contributor. >> >>If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please >>explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet >>been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. >> >>Thank you, >> >>Martin & Thomas >>bess chairs >> >>[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election/ >> >>_______________________________________________ >>BESS mailing list >>BESS@ietf.org >>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess > >_______________________________________________ >BESS mailing list >BESS@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess From nobody Thu Jan 14 19:26:59 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E8F01A895D for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2016 19:26:58 -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 YziTUc3R6b_X for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2016 19:26:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1bon0794.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::1:794]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F31161A88B9 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2016 19:26:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from BLUPR0501MB1761.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.163.120.28) by BLUPR05MB275.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.22.149) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.365.19; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 03:26:35 +0000 Received: from BLUPR0501MB1761.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.163.120.28]) by BLUPR0501MB1761.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.163.120.28]) with mapi id 15.01.0365.023; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 03:26:35 +0000 From: Tapraj Singh To: Kishore Tiruveedhula , "Satya Mohanty (satyamoh)" , Martin Vigoureux , "bess@ietf.org" , "draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election@tools.ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 Thread-Index: AQHRTE+xT/swt9xQB02va0E2sdiKdZ77QrGAgACsaID//3s7gA== Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 03:26:35 +0000 Message-ID: References: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.6.0.151221 authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=tsingh@juniper.net; x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-originating-ip: [66.129.239.15] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BLUPR05MB275; 5:2gwq4U4K3OzgMxJWiOzSMRH5GG2T0xC2F7s6Zg8yCBUyStZyUJ5E7O+jRFOFyEkXZ5Qce1TKxU1zKmRWkzvjYfsWHt1Iu2u2s2ooXs/+9WsLRXDQnO4Tr4MfiD458Rpfn72S8jF1A3250KDQc9gbGw==; 24:6CdS38cT5L1P9+wX5UgBQSbULcbQdvE33wE448fgRn0TpTNguIDQv/9BFtZ2dGbAtgt2Fhl4pzPqWs5BEpKDujMeCW6BNTXvxQHjmSUsSLA= x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BLUPR05MB275; x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 0b822cd7-4ad0-45a1-3881-08d31d5bac2d x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(61489475475257)(138986009662008); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(520078)(3002001)(10201501046); SRVR:BLUPR05MB275; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BLUPR05MB275; x-forefront-prvs: 08220FA8D6 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(164054003)(24454002)(199003)(189002)(377454003)(479174004)(5008740100001)(1220700001)(54356999)(1096002)(3846002)(6116002)(586003)(102836003)(2501003)(87936001)(10400500002)(50986999)(76176999)(2950100001)(101416001)(2900100001)(86362001)(40100003)(66066001)(19580395003)(122556002)(92566002)(19580405001)(1941001)(230783001)(15975445007)(2201001)(5001960100002)(36756003)(5001770100001)(99286002)(189998001)(106116001)(4001350100001)(106356001)(97736004)(105586002)(107886002)(77096005)(5004730100002)(81156007)(2906002)(5002640100001)(11100500001)(83506001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BLUPR05MB275; H:BLUPR0501MB1761.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <45843A585937D44E8D90C7066648C307@namprd05.prod.outlook.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 15 Jan 2016 03:26:35.4433 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BLUPR05MB275 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 03:26:58 -0000 I support this draft. It improves the stability with the better DF election algorithm. Thanks, Tapraj On 1/14/16, 7:21 PM, "BESS on behalf of Kishore Tiruveedhula" wrote: >I support this draft. It improves the stability with the better DF >election algorithm. > >Thanks, >Kishore > > >> >>On 1/11/16, 1:07 AM, "BESS on behalf of Martin Vigoureux" >> >>wrote: >> >>>Hello working group, >>> >>>This email starts a two-week poll on adopting >>>draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 [1] as a working group item. >>> >>>Please state on the list if you support adoption or not (in the both >>>cases, please also state the reasons). >>> >>>This poll runs until *the 25th of January*. >>> >>>Currently no IPR has been disclosed against this document. >>> >>>*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that >>>applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in >>>compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 >>>and 5378 for more details). >>> >>>=3D=3D> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please >>>respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any >>>relevant IPR. >>> >>>The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from >>>each author and contributor. >>> >>>If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please >>>explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet >>>been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. >>> >>>Thank you, >>> >>>Martin & Thomas >>>bess chairs >>> >>>[1]=20 >>>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election/ >>> >>>_______________________________________________ >>>BESS mailing list >>>BESS@ietf.org >>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess >> >>_______________________________________________ >>BESS mailing list >>BESS@ietf.org >>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess > >_______________________________________________ >BESS mailing list >BESS@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess From nobody Thu Jan 14 21:47:28 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C7971AD1F5 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2016 21:47:27 -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 NaAs8vR1dDE8 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2016 21:47:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from usplmg21.ericsson.net (usplmg21.ericsson.net [198.24.6.65]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 365AA1AD1EC for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2016 21:47:24 -0800 (PST) X-AuditID: c6180641-f799c6d000007d66-53-569887dc9eb4 Received: from EUSAAHC003.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [147.117.188.81]) by usplmg21.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 4B.26.32102.CD788965; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 06:47:08 +0100 (CET) Received: from EUSAAMB103.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.120]) by EUSAAHC003.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.81]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 00:47:23 -0500 From: Autumn Liu To: Kishore Tiruveedhula , "Satya Mohanty (satyamoh)" , Martin Vigoureux , "bess@ietf.org" , "draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election@tools.ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 Thread-Index: AQHRTE+mAcPtf/kjAkaoSr3+PrfzEJ77loOAgACsaID//9K54A== Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 05:47:21 +0000 Message-ID: References: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: zh-CN, 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="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFupjkeLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42KZXLonUPdO+4wwg3WXZCxWHJ/JbHFz0zRW iyVLd7FY3Nn1hdXi0alJjA6sHq3P9rJ6TPm9kdVjyZKfTB7Xm66ye3y5/JktgDWKyyYlNSez LLVI3y6BK+P4zh+MBXOEK5bvOs7ewDhZoIuRk0NCwETi2qEd7BC2mMSFe+vZuhi5OIQEjjBK bPz0gAkkISSwnFHi8HIuEJtNQEti3/537CBFIgJrmCSebHnBApIQFvCVeNx1ihnEFhEIkNg6 bRErhO0kMWdPC9gGFgFViSPXd4DV8wLVb905jQViQa3E4Usr2UBsTgEjiWM3GhhBbEYBWYlp j+6DHcEsIC5x68l8JohLBSSW7DnPDGGLSrx8/I8VwlaSmPP6GjNEvY7Egt2f2CBsbYllC18z Q+wVlDg58wnLBEbRWUjGzkLSMgtJyywkLQsYWVYxcpQWF+TkphsZbmIExtIxCTbHHYx7ez0P MQpwMCrx8BZozAgTYk0sK67MPcQowcGsJMK7vAEoxJuSWFmVWpQfX1Sak1p8iFGag0VJnDdR pjFMSCA9sSQ1OzW1ILUIJsvEwSnVwKg/PX9yrV3+U7n9TyKVGTm+RGrtvRCZKq650X/uJJX8 xe9Zvsye8b535s41Hwu4/22bEXevaPsxsQVPP1vXic7/4bVKQnbp1OuXvBR53tjN1Nlie/3d x8ctZ9abtv3/cKHVr+n+htV7q+T9prOIO7/pm+WZEtjU0XZMJc58Q4dz91GLJRKh24SUWIoz Eg21mIuKEwH2z3YfoQIAAA== Archived-At: Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 05:47:27 -0000 I support the adoption of this draft, it clarifies RFC 7432 with DF FSM and= improves the operational experience by introducing a new DF election algor= ithm. Thanks, Autumn -----Original Message----- From: BESS [mailto:bess-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Kishore Tiruveedhula Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2016 7:22 PM To: Satya Mohanty (satyamoh); Martin Vigoureux; bess@ietf.org; draft-mohant= y-bess-evpn-df-election@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-= 02 I support this draft. It improves the stability with the better DF election= algorithm. Thanks, Kishore > >On 1/11/16, 1:07 AM, "BESS on behalf of Martin Vigoureux" >martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com> >wrote: > >>Hello working group, >> >>This email starts a two-week poll on adopting >>draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 [1] as a working group item. >> >>Please state on the list if you support adoption or not (in the both=20 >>cases, please also state the reasons). >> >>This poll runs until *the 25th of January*. >> >>Currently no IPR has been disclosed against this document. >> >>*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that=20 >>applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in=20 >>compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for=20 >>more details). >> >>=3D=3D> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please=20 >>respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any=20 >>relevant IPR. >> >>The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from=20 >>each author and contributor. >> >>If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please=20 >>explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet=20 >>been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. >> >>Thank you, >> >>Martin & Thomas >>bess chairs >> >>[1]=20 >>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election/ >> >>_______________________________________________ >>BESS mailing list >>BESS@ietf.org >>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess > >_______________________________________________ >BESS mailing list >BESS@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess _______________________________________________ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess From nobody Thu Jan 14 22:50:01 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 478491B29FF; Thu, 14 Jan 2016 22:49:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-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 EUpsbX48mwBz; Thu, 14 Jan 2016 22:49:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 31FFA1B2A29; Thu, 14 Jan 2016 22:49:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.13] (unknown [49.149.213.215]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2F77E18013CB; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 07:49:51 +0100 (CET) To: Eric C Rosen , idr@ietf.org, BESS , mpls@ietf.org References: <5696933E.1080802@juniper.net> From: Loa Andersson Message-ID: <56989686.2000100@pi.nu> Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 14:49:42 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5696933E.1080802@juniper.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [bess] [Idr] draft-rosen-idr-rfc3107bis-00 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 06:49:59 -0000 Eric, In this particular case I think "cross-posting" is necessary. One small reflection for what it is worth. If there is no strong reason to put this in one working group or another, there is probably no strong reason to change the home of a draft either. /Loa On 2016-01-14 02:11, Eric C Rosen wrote: > Folks, > > Pardon the cross-post, but I think this may be of interest to all three > of the IDR, MPLS, and BESS WGs. > > I've posted draft-rosen-idr-rfc3107bis-00 ("Using BGP to Bind MPLS > Labels to Address Prefixes"), which is intended of course to obsolete > RFC 3107 ("Carrying Label Information in BGP"). (While I put "idr" in > the name of the draft, it's not completely obvious which WG should own > this draft (assuming it progresses)). > > The purpose of this draft is the following: > > - It fixes a number of errors in RFC3107. It attempts to do so in a way > that is compatible with existing implementations. > > - It removes the material about "Advertising Multiple Routes to a > Destination". This is a feature that was never implemented as > specified, and the text about it just causes confusion. The > functionality that this feature was intended to provide can now be > better provided by using add-paths; this is discussed in the draft. > > - It is explicit about its applicability to SAFI 128 as well as to SAFI 4. > > - It clarifies the procedures for withdrawing and replacing label bindings. > > - It discusses the relationship between SAFI-1 routes and SAFI-4 routes, > which is very unclear in RFC3107. Different implementations have > treated the SAFI-1/SAFI-4 interactions differently, and the draft > discusses these differences. However, as the draft is not intended to > favor any one implementation over another, it can't do much more than > point out some of the differences among implementations. > > - RFC 3107 provides an encoding that allows BGP to assign multiple > labels (i.e., a label stack) to a given prefix. However, it provides no > semantics for this, and this feature has been only rarely implemented. > In fact, it is believed that some implementations will not parse the > Updates correctly if they encode multiple labels in the NLRI. Therefore > the draft only allows a label stack to be assigned to a given prefix if > a new Capability has been exchanged. It also discusses the semantics of > assigning a label stack, and gives some examples of how this might be used. > > I hope that those of you who are interested in this topic will provide > your comments. I've tried to make the draft compatible with existing > implementations and deployments, so if anyone sees anything that > negatively impacts an existing implementation, please comment on that. > > I also removed most of the text that explains why it is a good idea to > use BGP to distribute label bindings. That text was important in the > '90s, but now seems rather out of date. However, I would welcome > comments on whether an updated "motivation/positioning" section should > be added. > > Thanks, > > Eric > > _______________________________________________ > Idr mailing list > Idr@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr From nobody Fri Jan 15 10:01:16 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B4BD1B308A; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 10:01:15 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 Dw3UEikbY3Ek; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 10:01:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2on0129.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.100.129]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D70281B3085; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 10:01:12 -0800 (PST) Authentication-Results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=erosen@juniper.net; Received: from [172.29.35.81] (66.129.241.12) by SN1PR0501MB2158.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.163.229.152) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.365.19; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 18:01:09 +0000 To: References: <5696933E.1080802@juniper.net> <20421_1452784714_5697BC4A_20421_2179_1_53C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A0F791AE7@OPEXCLILM21.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> From: Eric C Rosen Message-ID: <569933E1.7000104@juniper.net> Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 13:01:05 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20421_1452784714_5697BC4A_20421_2179_1_53C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A0F791AE7@OPEXCLILM21.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [66.129.241.12] X-ClientProxiedBy: BY2PR08CA0007.namprd08.prod.outlook.com (25.163.62.145) To SN1PR0501MB2158.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (25.163.229.152) X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; SN1PR0501MB2158; 2:YLAtsVufOQ0RW20UEP4vSPrsXMZz5AWJCQxk6XJ7TQ07iihu/QMFkzN3PUzrAY/lLsDYBXyawuQUbMB6ywHqQ5hHYOMNmh0tyek3FgacaqFdo3GqBIKcasRH3jvFziPqUaswuvjY5kLiCLKKYytFbQ==; 3:ZFuAmh7G9M5sqKxP4hPk5AaHfbh7wogtdSIRyp9IvYdRMGtoNfySnWpg+4b6sHjopsVTJZp0NrD/RRFmrnevsZwfxikn22yh+V5suCYnD2oFuy+NgUetFGN/Jp50ZchV; 25:bG31oiigTmFIyz/k72L8BcKMfO/4Itq4xSr2x9OW2udWNGCMqFBApquDEpgz7g68KJ9+hZE3Sc+Pe9rqVk1XF66o7C493ElPg0+/YtXLBzwCWThTIieu5YFppC/4+PMmu0SsonThI+mI4bppQ+zwDKPyXORw/4VuhFilWvBpiptdC4qiXuD0YjSfapOhP5k419VaX0R2c2XDBSKDK742upF2p9nMVBlfR7GZExE5mAtTIWWADJ4BFTuS5nCzHAUC X-Microsoft-Antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:SN1PR0501MB2158; X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: 2842bd9f-8cc4-4dd7-e371-08d31dd5d9f1 X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; SN1PR0501MB2158; 20: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; 4:aKPXGIxecab0PpXGCrhY/pEk0t2MPCv7GIQxHrRyZpxPeO2iTL6gv7ubzsQH6kzhVN99Ti0MAwM8rj5WmByTmXr3bMTtNeNPZNUBl3UQsMYmNQL78j8lWPEzysbvCyI7Yofuh1iZM+NnEbLnQHxs1cLglfO1vWDCGlGZTn7EIkbdnhuSsGt+5FkD+qg3q8tkfg0FACfn9E1E2P2wmKROf9Td5gGXbvYIpWDYEAmf4fRGDXdJnWdOgM0PW4VDbr23MqVUOFINvuR9ygx9grW/BqPoSGR+US2wDmJ0hEh3wur6U3ApB4BRG8cI6UDjkDyB2k7JZEaudYS9OKDtUH+RL8004KY3A3sLfBCz1qRDls+hvwUWB/0BJ/+ZSkl8r+qC X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-Test: UriScan:; X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(520078)(10201501046)(3002001); SRVR:SN1PR0501MB2158; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:SN1PR0501MB2158; X-Forefront-PRVS: 08220FA8D6 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6049001)(6009001)(189002)(31014005)(199003)(52604005)(2950100001)(77096005)(101416001)(5008740100001)(86362001)(92566002)(2906002)(33656002)(3846002)(40100003)(122386002)(4326007)(5004730100002)(50466002)(1096002)(6116002)(586003)(42186005)(5001960100002)(189998001)(59896002)(36756003)(54356999)(110136002)(87266999)(4001350100001)(65816999)(81156007)(97736004)(47776003)(87976001)(50986999)(230783001)(83506001)(23746002)(2351001)(80316001)(64126003)(65956001)(66066001)(65806001)(106356001)(99136001)(76176999)(105586002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:SN1PR0501MB2158; H:[172.29.35.81]; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; Received-SPF: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: =?Windows-1252?Q?1; SN1PR0501MB2158; 23:pI7dfvafUg2rC7o0M/Y7J9C1pqnWlG1YU5j?= =?Windows-1252?Q?RF9pfsKP/ZItqTbU25uvj14cCfWPSP04OXSDa94CttAoAXAYHeCjXn1g?= =?Windows-1252?Q?jwZO+70UrQAtCshzcDFuDTu8nigll5P3oWuvr9HPAdvd9yiUmLK9XlzK?= =?Windows-1252?Q?9AU/SJbn0oMfCEWBEkLlrzgHxMHaLVihnqjup84hBzvbCz2hY1+AE5ir?= =?Windows-1252?Q?npLZxHPFu2dETfpYSgKoqtjJKJ2w+DQuEkdbpISgVpb/NkmlqpnZoXVV?= =?Windows-1252?Q?WC3s5S3i3V8v03KdIn4n7Fo7dm6fhktXGouOtFVUe/YP160Wdm8pVFfh?= =?Windows-1252?Q?3RigiLYT7nbrL44vrqx/CAKTMTO7uQ5RlFFjlcSoHcoaYTlPZv3CaalT?= =?Windows-1252?Q?D88hGapX8stIUCWfuYZ9T3ahVXZPMYPlDRU0zi/E9Et7o1g9SkhqVJmL?= =?Windows-1252?Q?aMTItFTJ9XqdlLGLZU9oqtLorfFTVEtGqBFAGCFRrmq5q64PBjyRazeQ?= =?Windows-1252?Q?Kto0JBGQRnvIDyq+3l0+RaEZmSmQ5B1WxIJ1m5xWwXt4Ckzs/t6UA10X?= =?Windows-1252?Q?0+R+0fCzXM2YYpW7hiv6lLRk/LXRQ096UY+QdeM/WxQrCwOSdSLd8lw/?= =?Windows-1252?Q?ILY8wkFQ1XGM4WEad51IBej4Yewa3V8ScCt5x/jQVxf4x2pN8U4Wj0Jh?= =?Windows-1252?Q?KcexhVgV9FGlan95zhBPTwM+H0dfktGW8duOrDi+5BNmgWOPs+2aN8N5?= =?Windows-1252?Q?BtPXYVvB5fPzX1lxzSytZMiQFvo802el/pLxeikjDOv01//q/D9RQXx+?= =?Windows-1252?Q?jcCFdJSquXT8veA/7rwWwcSaRw7npY/Oh5IdcOEsBAhTX41m4CGyJA4G?= =?Windows-1252?Q?6YQ7wuz89qEqvE5kCpYiUWoP5h3SyEzPUesioBK5a7F0U8TqBVlenbeN?= =?Windows-1252?Q?TSzMflrAb8WeS1hHxwDTC++5viW7aQy9dvbx/4WvttZj65SQvRivj5N+?= =?Windows-1252?Q?9mD9v/6rJ30mAZMPq5G2PBpESvpWZWvbeWp4VVInZtOcp1cX/okKKyWs?= =?Windows-1252?Q?rgw1dH01fmiMMfF0ygzSSOo2YllIRSlMXYGMsfril+6Cja+5+lkipDVp?= =?Windows-1252?Q?hl35Up/tx7uOndGo1gAcDSf5pv42iWj//kwSpC1ng9qrWAphYs3zrLOM?= =?Windows-1252?Q?1ZHNIhhUMYhMk4GnQWeW4xB/4YIqmiyrsT0SYFrkJGnAKOB4SVn2pvK4?= =?Windows-1252?Q?iu0dayKlVCVcXns5q0PW6Exjj7T4zHuxjm3zDvc7ICBaoWmTSDaII60H?= =?Windows-1252?Q?Ias7+T5EBRaZqnMg9K/w/VvKcanEla8VzLhfSOzy8P5r1s+31Cm/kSY0?= =?Windows-1252?Q?UyXt8zR+lTFvB/59FdLYJ5ltUnSKGJKOU+Q=3D=3D?= X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; SN1PR0501MB2158; 5:MdsfsRHYS+gT5KWL7Bo9sGJ0VTZBLCKpfB0/uM1BZrgy8lLkOVJevWbZvxLTJ3t4NImpqgSTLrztPas+XjV3aYjhlXqRnUx19ikNXUl3y/pbn4x2iKHTTCsBFWak2JofgLIikw+sir7ImwoEvFmviA==; 24:bux7oR+246sTnVRkK597UAWZMuGJrs+7a0WMD/PtpOJ80Zdyo2NbYG8WkoTxBb/lbGzoy5/3KIahFw/TmeVsmvOfnjSbskTiNoFyBI9S3fM= X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Jan 2016 18:01:09.8619 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SN1PR0501MB2158 Archived-At: Cc: "idr@ietf.org" , BESS , "mpls@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [bess] draft-rosen-idr-rfc3107bis-00 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 18:01:15 -0000 Bruno, Thanks for reviewing the draft! >> - RFC 3107 provides an encoding that allows BGP to assign multiple labels > Upfront, the current issue is that implementations, which claim compliance with RFC 3107, are just non-compliant. So the draft is proposing to change the specification to make such implementations compliant, while another option would be to fix implementation (to be compliant with the RFC they claim to support). I think the best approach is to try to write 3107bis in such a way that the existing deployed implementations are compliant to it. > The main issue I have, is that this draft is not backward compatible with RFC 3107 (as a RFC 3107 speaker will never notice that its peer has not send the new capability, and may still send multiple labels). Plus in case of error due to this incompatibility, the error handling behavior is likely to be "BGP session shutdown" (as the NLRI "cannot" be correctly parsed) which is disruptive. Plus the implementation A not supporting multiple labels, will claim that the implementation B supporting multiple labels is "not compliant" with rfc3107bis, while I would rather argue that this is implementation A which is not compliant with RFC 3107. Luckily, the existing deployed implementations, as far as I know, do not support multiple labels. If a new implementation were to send multiple labels to an old implementation, we would likely experience the disruptive behavior you describe. 3107bis tries to prevent this disruption. > > I'd propose one change: > - Capability means: I don't support receiving multiple labels, hence you SHOULD not send that to me. > - Even if the capability is not advertised by both peers, and hence a single label is expected, all implementations MUST check that the "S" bit (in this first label) is set to 1. If the bit is cleared, the Prefix MUST be identified as per RFC 3107/this document and treated as withdraw as defined in RFC 7606. > > This means more work for rfc3107bis speakers, but we can't ask existing speakers to do the job. Especially since they were compliant with RFC 3107. If only a single label is expected, there is no real reason to check the S bit. I'm not sure that all existing implementations actually set the S bit, so requiring new implementations to check for it would just introduce a possible backwards compatibility problem. > Plus very minor comments > - From an editorial standpoint, I'd personally favor removing §2.2 and saying in 2.3(or elsewhere) that if the capability is not exchanged, a single label may be encoded. (IMHO duplicating the text is less easy to read and more error prone. And I believe this would be enough to address your point). I went back and forth on this issue, and I'd welcome more opinions on this from the WG. You are right that it is generally a bad practice to have so much duplicated text in a specification, but I thought the intention would be clearer if the encoding for multiple labels were described separately from the encoding for single labels. > - In Figure 2 (§2.3), 2 labels are indicated. Do you think there is a need to indicate which one is the first (Label 1) and which one is the k th (Label k). Indeed, the order of the labels is significant when the router will need to push them in the dataplane. Or a sentence could be added to make this explicit. This is mentioned in the "Data Plane" section, but I think you're right, it should be mentioned in section 2.3 as well. > - In §4, there is a possible case which is not described: > S1 receives L11, L12,... L1k > S1 sends L21, L12,... L1k > S1 programs in the data plane: L21 swap L11 > Compared to sending a single label (L21), S1 avoids having to push k labels in its dataplane, which it may be incapable of. > - In §4 > "While this may be useful in certain scenarios, it may provide unintended results in other scenarios." I fail to see when this can be useful as N1 or downstream LSR will receive packets with labels there are not aware of (L22...L2k). Out of curiosity, I'm be curious to know the useful scenario that you have in mind. Actually, I was thinking of the case you just described above, but I wanted to formulate it in a more general way. For all we know, may be domain-wide unique labels ;-), or S1 may have some other way of knowing L21 will get the packet to a node that will be able to understand . > - in §5 " It is possible that a BGP speaker will receive both a SAFI-1 route > for prefix P and a SAFI-4 route for prefix P. The significance of > this is a matter of local policy." > For 6PE (rfc4798), may be this should not be a local policy but be specified as a priori SAFI-1 and SAFI-4 prefix should be comparable. Ideally rfc4798 could have specified this but I haven't check if it's done. Alternatively §5 could reference this case. > (Same point for propagation between SAFI-1 and SAFI-4) In 3107bis, I just tried to capture the fact that different implementations handle this differently. If a particular application needs to mandate a particular behavior, that should be part of the spec for that application. Eric From nobody Fri Jan 15 22:56:36 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 662F61A020B for ; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 22:56:34 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.99 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.99 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_REMOTE_IMAGE=0.01, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=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 QbAkNA3ldT2o for ; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 22:56:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from rediffmail.com (f4mail-235-241.rediffmail.com [202.137.235.241]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 090911A01FC for ; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 22:56:30 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 9263 invoked by uid 510); 16 Jan 2016 06:56:24 -0000 Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=redf; d=rediffmail.com; b=ApGBeWptX6cR76HQympZSg3yEJADIsq06DOzAd5AY8e14C+dg8NncW4P2by4oISsZ0XWehIXVx5wyRhho2Uekx1op50VWW3YvtHOsg6Ekt5fsVfZ972txWOmu39XPvrzCqn477tONONNANTQ7L0jJJC7VkvHu1xedCZieCZP4KI= ; x-m-msg: asd54ad564ad7aa6sd5as6d5; a6da7d6asas6dasd77; 5dad65ad5sd; X-OUT-VDRT-SpamState: 0\LEGIT X-OUT-VDRT-SpamScore: 20 X-OUT-VDRT-SpamCause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrfeekiedrledvgddutdeiucetufdoteggodetrfdotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuggftfghnshhusghstghrihgsvgenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucdhkfhnvhhishhisghlvgcufihorhgushculddvtddmnecujfgurhepffggvffkjghsuffhtgesrgdtreertddtjeenucfhrhhomhepfdhsuhguvggvphcughcughhgghdfuceoshhuughhihhnjhgrtghosgesrhgvughifhhfmhgrihhlrdgtohhmqeenucffohhmrghinheprhgvughifhhfrdgtohhmpdhivghtfhdrohhrghenucfrrghrrghmpehmohguvgepshhmthhpohhuth X-Remote-IP: 116.197.184.12 X-REDF-OSEN: sudhinjacob@rediffmail.com Date: 16 Jan 2016 06:56:24 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Received: from unknown 116.197.184.12 by rediffmail.com via HTTP; 16 Jan 2016 06:56:24 -0000 X-Senderscore: D=0&S=0 Message-ID: <1452828426.S.9382.20869.f4-235-220.1452927384.9024@webmail.rediffmail.com> In-Reply-To: Sender: sudhinjacob@rediffmail.com From: "sudeep g ggg" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_2ccad055072b7619ea4cb956f6332e0c" Archived-At: Cc: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election@tools.ietf.org, satyamoh@cisco.com, martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com, kishoret@juniper.net Subject: Re: [bess] =?utf-8?q?Poll_for_adoption=3A_draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-?= =?utf-8?q?election-02?= X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2016 06:56:34 -0000 --=_2ccad055072b7619ea4cb956f6332e0c Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi All, I support this draft. Regards, Sudhin On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 08:57:06 +0530 Tapraj Singh wrote >I support this draft. It improves the stability with the better DF election algorithm. Thanks, Tapraj On 1/14/16, 7:21 PM, "BESS on behalf of Kishore Tiruveedhula" wrote: >I support this draft. It improves the stability with the better DF >election algorithm. > >Thanks, >Kishore > > >> >>On 1/11/16, 1:07 AM, "BESS on behalf of Martin Vigoureux" >> >>wrote: >> >>>Hello working group, >>> >>>This email starts a two-week poll on adopting >>>draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 [1] as a working group item. >>> >>>Please state on the list if you support adoption or not (in the both >>>cases, please also state the reasons). >>> >>>This poll runs until *the 25th of January*. >>> >>>Currently no IPR has been disclosed against this document. >>> >>>*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that >>>applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in >>>compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 >>>and 5378 for more details). >>> >>>==> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please >>>respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any >>>relevant IPR. >>> >>>The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from >>>each author and contributor. >>> >>>If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please >>>explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet >>>been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. >>> >>>Thank you, >>> >>>Martin & Thomas >>>bess chairs >>> >>>[1] >>>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election/ >>> >>>_______________________________________________ >>>BESS mailing list >>>BESS@ietf.org >>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess >> >>_______________________________________________ >>BESS mailing list >>BESS@ietf.org >>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess > >_______________________________________________ >BESS mailing list >BESS@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess _______________________________________________ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess --=_2ccad055072b7619ea4cb956f6332e0c Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Hi All,

I support this draft.

Regards,
Sudhin

On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 08:57:06 +0530 Tapraj Singh wrote<= br /> >I support this draft. It improves the stability with the better DF

election algorithm.



Thanks,

Tapraj





On 1/14/16, 7:21 PM, "BESS on behalf of Kishore Tiruveedhula"

wrote:



>I support this draft. It improves the stability with the better DF

>election algorithm.

>

>Thanks,

>Kishore

>

>

>>

>>On 1/11/16, 1:07 AM, "BESS on behalf of Martin Vigoureux"

>><= br />
>>wrote:

>>

>>>Hello working group,

>>>

>>>This email starts a two-week poll on adopting

>>>draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 [1] as a working group item.

>>>

>>>Please state on the list if you support adoption or not (in the both

>>>cases, please also state the reasons).

>>>

>>>This poll runs until *the 25th of January*.

>>>

>>>Currently no IPR has been disclosed against this document.

>>>

>>>*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that

>>>applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in

>>>compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669

>>>and 5378 for more details).

>>>

>>>=3D=3D> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please
>>>respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any
>>>relevant IPR.

>>>

>>>The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from
>>>each author and contributor.

>>>

>>>If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please

>>>explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet

>>>been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules.

>>>

>>>Thank you,

>>>

>>>Martin & Thomas

>>>bess chairs

>>>

>>>[1]

>>>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election/
>>>

>>>_______________________________________________

>>>BESS mailing list

>>>BESS@ietf.org

>>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

>>

>>_______________________________________________

>>BESS mailing list

>>BESS@ietf.org

>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

>

>_______________________________________________

>BESS mailing list

>BESS@ietf.org

>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess



_______________________________________________

BESS mailing list

BESS@ietf.org

https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess


Get your own FREE website, FREE domain & FREE mobile app with Company email.  
Know More >
--=_2ccad055072b7619ea4cb956f6332e0c-- From nobody Mon Jan 18 11:22:11 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE99B1B3C31; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 11:22:09 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -13.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-13.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, J_CHICKENPOX_37=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 5gNiG5tg62ll; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 11:22:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com [173.37.86.74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E50111B3C32; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 11:22:04 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=8055; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1453144924; x=1454354524; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=e6IhL4AFQG4veG1fR707MHNmMKzR+edu/KdtmK2Kpt0=; b=ICsYqZop3ulADxyIiYph2YH6/UTOhnT3AQkR1UNyBHuP+/A3wI3cxBDw 9DHNlkm75dv9CmaP7w2FMzJsMD1ggV4F2NiqRmyjpWKrDypMDbXyBXUki qHl0typd5P84ZdCefznv1MEsi/4sFrxO0BxbLvKsLEuKETmlg6LfzAdBl g=; X-Files: signature.asc : 496 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0C8AgAuO51W/5BdJa1egzpSLEEGiFCxM?= =?us-ascii?q?oITDoFiJIVrgTk4FAEBAQEBAQGBCoQ7IwQnPQEcEAEdAjMBJwQBIA8BA4d6DgO?= =?us-ascii?q?uc5AKAQEBAQEFAQEBAQEVCYhkgWyFQjkSgmsugRsFjUKJWAGCd4FmaoIuhWmBX?= =?us-ascii?q?kqDeohfimyDcAEgAUOCEQUWgV1yAYYzgQgBAQE?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,313,1449532800"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="68141780" Received: from rcdn-core-8.cisco.com ([173.37.93.144]) by rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 18 Jan 2016 19:21:48 +0000 Received: from XCH-RCD-002.cisco.com (xch-rcd-002.cisco.com [173.37.102.12]) by rcdn-core-8.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u0IJLmYD030530 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 18 Jan 2016 19:21:48 GMT Received: from xch-aln-002.cisco.com (173.36.7.12) by XCH-RCD-002.cisco.com (173.37.102.12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 13:21:47 -0600 Received: from xch-aln-002.cisco.com ([173.36.7.12]) by XCH-ALN-002.cisco.com ([173.36.7.12]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 13:21:47 -0600 From: "Matt Miller (mamille2)" To: "draft-ietf-l3vpn-end-system.all@ietf.org" , "bess@ietf.org" , "apps-discuss@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: APPDIR Review of draft-ietf-l3vpn-end-system-05 Thread-Index: AQHRUiV53gVx+I3+/kmFDLZltW8T5g== Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 19:21:47 +0000 Message-ID: <311A5336-EC6E-40DC-B449-634225F95267@cisco.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-pgp-agent: GPGMail 2.6b2 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.24.81.135] Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_B81A6EB9-7439-4478-90AC-7795D60E663C"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Subject: [bess] APPDIR Review of draft-ietf-l3vpn-end-system-05 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 19:22:09 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_B81A6EB9-7439-4478-90AC-7795D60E663C Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 I have been selected as the Applications in ART Directorate reviewer = for this draft (for background on appsdir, please see = =E2=80=8Bhttp://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/wiki/ApplicationsAreaDir= ectorate ). Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft. Document: draft-ietf-l3vpn-end-system-05 Title: BGP-signaled end-system IP/VPNs Reviewer: Matt Miller Review Date: 2016-01-18 IETF Last Call Date: N/A IESG Telechat Date: N/A Summary: This draft is not ready for publication as a Proposed Standard. Comments: This draft is making assumptions and design decisions that are not = really compatible with XMPP, and these should be resolved before publishing. It's important to note XMPP is an end-to-end application routing protocol. Clients are capable of sending data to other clients, possibly crossing multiple server boundaries. For example: 1) client-a@server-1.example --> 2) server-1.example --> 3) muc.example --> 4) server-2.example --> 5) client-b@server-2.example This document seems to make the assumption that routing is purely between a client and its sever, which I believe has lead to design decisions that are very problematic. Major Issues: (All of which apply to Section 6. XMPP Signaling Protocol) * The addressing scheme for End Systems connecting to the external VPN Forwarder is not explicitly documented anywhere -- the only instance I can deduce is from the external VPN forwarded subscription example, which seems to use a domain JID for the End System. Without a clear XMPP addressing scheme, properly routing stanzas across the XMPP network and mutually authenticating TLS according to RFC 6125 (and possibly [XEP-0178]) seem problematic to me. If End Systems are expected to communicate directly with the Route Server (e.g., End System addresses stanzas to the Route Server, which the VPN Forwarder is expected to relay), the addressing scheme for all components needs to be better defined. For instance, the VPN Forwarder address in XMPP could be a domain JID as it is, while the End System address could be a bare JID derived from that VPN Forwarder's JID (e.g., "end-system@forwarder.example"). This would disambiguate the XMPP routing across the XMPP network. However, if VPN Forwarders are to act as proxies for End Systems, then it should act as a proxy in all cases -- End Systems subscribe to pubsub nodes on the external VPN Forwarder (which could in turn trigger a subscribe of the VPN forwarder to the Route Server), and receive notifications from the VPN Forwarder (which in turn are first received by the VPN Forwarder from the Route Server). * Using a hard-coded JID for the Route Server can be a serious problem = if there is ever a case where individual Route Servers oversee different routing information. If this is never the case, then a single JID for all Route Servers is probably OK, but I think there could be problems with properly authenticating the TLS session. Using a different JID for each Route Server can introduce some difficulties for End Systems utilizing external VPN Forwarders, but I think only in the case where the End System is expected to subscribe to the Route Server directly -- if the End System actually subscribes to the VPN Forwarder, then the End System already knows the VPN Forwarder's JID and would not need to determine the Route Server' JID. Minor Issues: (all apply to Section 6. XMPP Signaling Protocol) * The XEP-0060 PubSub subscription and unsubscription examples are incorrect. Specifically, the 'jid' attribute of the element is the subscriber's JID not the pubsub service, and subscription options are encoded using Data Forms [XEP-0004]. The co-located example then is: 1 The external example could be the following (if there is a single addressing scheme): 100 The unsubscribe example is then: * Requiring pubsub notifications to always go from the Route Server to the VPN Forwarder regardless of what entity subscribed to the pubsub node is counter to how XEP-0060 works. The pubsub subscribe request specifies where the notifications are supposed to go, and the pubsub service is expected to honor that. See above in the addressing discussion for some ideas of how to deal with this. Nits: * (Mostly in Section 6. XMPP Signaling Protocol) The document often uses the term "message" when discussing XMPP communications. The XMPP term of art is "stanza" not "message"; "message" has a specific meaning in XMPP that is not in use here, and can lead to confusion for readers of this document once they follow the references to RFC 6120 and the various XEPs. * In Section 1. Introduction, the use of the term XMPP should be followed by a reference to RFC 6120. * In Section 6. XMPP Signaling Protocol, the seventh paragraph (immediately preceding Figure 1) has an extraneous period (.) at the end of the last sentence. * In Section 6. XMPP Signaling Protocol, I understood the meaning of the following sentence: The VPN Forwarder SHOULD use as JID its hostname, when available, or an unique IP address within the infrastructure network win its string representation. Regardless of how my XMPP addressing concerns are finally resolved, please revisit this sentence. References: [XEP-0004]: Data Forms < http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0004.html > [XEP-0030]: Service Discovery < http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0030.html = > [XEP-0178]: Best Practices for Use of SASL EXTERNAL with Certificates < = http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0178.html > -- - m&m Matt Miller Cisco Systems, Inc. --Apple-Mail=_B81A6EB9-7439-4478-90AC-7795D60E663C Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJWnTtPAAoJEDWi+S0W7cO1mNgH/3wS66XY4nWnxDv2bJfxYBwm onTffLCXa8AEutixGFlOV7v92wn5z9G7ezHfQ5YQUpusPME8xYIHThUe8DKKrZII KzvGEbV9hKWowh/oBgAWiHXLSL/F9STAncfXZpp9Jq2HWOg7fOirbmdzlqreKoCI C4GAKN6iOSh9TjO0YCbR8kYf2e+b4wmjsi2ESBIkS21rVhDPwLw5NuvouGG9yRCP bBcPWnJGZrADnVwr9yMI0dyaVEb1HpmbyIXY2VqgT+EaPUlgNpbt1mewrV8jjxQy 9FSs1WoGP+p3IUkSbO4x1miPFmfx8evugVIFMpLCbRQJYUHiz1Pq/hJanD4HoVk= =Yma0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_B81A6EB9-7439-4478-90AC-7795D60E663C-- From nobody Tue Jan 19 00:51:08 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 576791ACC8C for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 00:51:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.885 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.885 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] 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 kxxz1QooBu9j for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 00:51:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from p-mail2.rd.orange.com (p-mail2.rd.orange.com [161.106.1.3]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46F831A9031 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 00:51:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from p-mail2.rd.orange.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 55D7BE30084; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 09:51:04 +0100 (CET) Received: from FTRDCH01.rd.francetelecom.fr (unknown [10.194.32.11]) by p-mail2.rd.orange.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 487BAE3007D; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 09:51:04 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.193.71.12] (10.193.71.12) by FTRDCH01.rd.francetelecom.fr (10.194.32.11) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.266.1; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 09:51:03 +0100 To: BESS , From: Thomas Morin Organization: Orange Message-ID: <569DF8F7.2000703@orange.com> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 09:51:03 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 08:51:06 -0000 Hello Working Group, This email starts a Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree [1] which is considered mature and ready for a final working group review. Please read the document if you haven't read the most recent version yet (-03), and send your comments to the list, no later than *February the 2nd* (2016-02-02). This is not only a call for comments on the document, but also a call of support for its publication. *Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that applies to draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree please respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. Thank you, Thomas/Martin [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree From nobody Tue Jan 19 05:29:38 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9CF51B2E9B for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 05:29:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 jmjqO4jsBpPv for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 05:29:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp-fr.alcatel-lucent.com (fr-hpgre-esg-02.alcatel-lucent.com [135.245.210.23]) (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 D56FA1B2E98 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 05:29:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from fr711umx2.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (unknown [135.245.210.39]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id CF024E34AF0C3; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 13:29:28 +0000 (GMT) Received: from fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.122]) by fr711umx2.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO-o) with ESMTP id u0JDTUeC028495 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 19 Jan 2016 13:29:30 GMT Received: from FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr711wxchhub01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.111]) by fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id u0JDTQGI010053 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 19 Jan 2016 14:29:29 +0100 Received: from FR711WXCHMBA07.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([169.254.3.17]) by FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.239.2.111]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 14:29:23 +0100 From: "HENDERICKX, Wim (Wim)" To: Thomas Morin , BESS , "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree@tools.ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree Thread-Index: AQHRUpaNTnVciU8730S/6KCf3LfoqZ8C1aSA Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 13:29:23 +0000 Message-ID: References: <569DF8F7.2000703@orange.com> In-Reply-To: <569DF8F7.2000703@orange.com> Accept-Language: nl-BE, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/0.0.0.151008 x-originating-ip: [135.239.27.39] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <28686958C8035C468D8E98BA3BB1B150@exchange.lucent.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 13:29:37 -0000 QXMgYSBjby1hdXRob3IgSSBiZWxpZXZlIHRoaXMgZG9jIGlzIG1hdHVyZSBhbmQgc3RhYmxlIGZv ciBmaW5hbCBXRyByZXZpZXcuDQpOb3QgYXdhcmUgb2YgSVBSIHJlbGF0ZWQgdG8gdGhlIGRyYWZ0 DQoNCg0KDQoNCk9uIDE5LzAxLzE2IDAwOjUxLCAiQkVTUyBvbiBiZWhhbGYgb2YgVGhvbWFzIE1v cmluIiA8YmVzcy1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3JnIG9uIGJlaGFsZiBvZiB0aG9tYXMubW9yaW5Ab3Jh bmdlLmNvbT4gd3JvdGU6DQoNCj5IZWxsbyBXb3JraW5nIEdyb3VwLA0KPg0KPlRoaXMgZW1haWwg c3RhcnRzIGEgV29ya2luZyBHcm91cCBMYXN0IENhbGwgb24gDQo+ZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1iZXNzLWV2 cG4tZXRyZWUgWzFdIHdoaWNoIGlzIGNvbnNpZGVyZWQgbWF0dXJlIGFuZCByZWFkeSBmb3IgDQo+ YSBmaW5hbCB3b3JraW5nIGdyb3VwIHJldmlldy4NCj4NCj5QbGVhc2UgcmVhZCB0aGUgZG9jdW1l bnQgaWYgeW91IGhhdmVuJ3QgcmVhZCB0aGUgbW9zdCByZWNlbnQgdmVyc2lvbiB5ZXQgDQo+KC0w MyksIGFuZCBzZW5kIHlvdXIgY29tbWVudHMgdG8gdGhlIGxpc3QsIG5vIGxhdGVyIHRoYW4gKkZl YnJ1YXJ5IHRoZSANCj4ybmQqICgyMDE2LTAyLTAyKS4NCj4NCj5UaGlzIGlzIG5vdCBvbmx5IGEg Y2FsbCBmb3IgY29tbWVudHMgb24gdGhlIGRvY3VtZW50LCBidXQgYWxzbyBhIGNhbGwgb2YgDQo+ c3VwcG9ydCBmb3IgaXRzIHB1YmxpY2F0aW9uLg0KPg0KPipDb2luY2lkZW50YWxseSosIHdlIGFy ZSBhbHNvIHBvbGxpbmcgZm9yIGtub3dsZWRnZSBvZiBhbnkgSVBSIHRoYXQgDQo+YXBwbGllcyB0 byBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLWJlc3MtZXZwbi1ldHJlZSwgdG8gZW5zdXJlIHRoYXQgSVBSIGhhcyBiZWVu IA0KPmRpc2Nsb3NlZCBpbiBjb21wbGlhbmNlIHdpdGggSUVURiBJUFIgcnVsZXMgKHNlZSBSRkNz IDM5NzksIDQ4NzksIDM2NjkgDQo+YW5kIDUzNzggZm9yIG1vcmUgZGV0YWlscykuDQo+DQo+Kklm KiB5b3UgYXJlIGxpc3RlZCBhcyBhIGRvY3VtZW50IGF1dGhvciBvciBjb250cmlidXRvciBvZiAN Cj5kcmFmdC1pZXRmLWJlc3MtZXZwbi1ldHJlZSBwbGVhc2UgcmVzcG9uZCB0byB0aGlzIGVtYWls IGFuZCBpbmRpY2F0ZSANCj53aGV0aGVyIG9yIG5vdCB5b3UgYXJlIGF3YXJlIG9mIGFueSByZWxl dmFudCBJUFIuDQo+DQo+VGhhbmsgeW91LA0KPg0KPlRob21hcy9NYXJ0aW4NCj4NCj5bMV0gaHR0 cHM6Ly9kYXRhdHJhY2tlci5pZXRmLm9yZy9kb2MvZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1iZXNzLWV2cG4tZXRyZWUN Cj4NCj5fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXw0KPkJF U1MgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQo+QkVTU0BpZXRmLm9yZw0KPmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21h aWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vYmVzcw0K From nobody Tue Jan 19 08:31:06 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EB081B31FF for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 08:31:05 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 AulfaXEU-muW for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 08:31:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2on0103.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.100.103]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF8111B31FD for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 08:31:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from SN1PR0501MB1709.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.163.130.155) by SN1PR0501MB1710.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.163.130.156) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.365.19; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 16:31:01 +0000 Received: from SN1PR0501MB1709.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.163.130.155]) by SN1PR0501MB1709.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.163.130.155]) with mapi id 15.01.0365.024; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 16:31:02 +0000 From: John E Drake To: "EXT - thomas.morin@orange.com" , BESS , "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree@tools.ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree Thread-Index: AQHRUpaLU5eVEAyVyUKkWBpc9BpEup8DCD5A Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 16:31:01 +0000 Message-ID: References: <569DF8F7.2000703@orange.com> In-Reply-To: <569DF8F7.2000703@orange.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=jdrake@juniper.net; x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.10] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; SN1PR0501MB1710; 5:p2oCFGdWLOf+iZRLul8I+oY6tcOQiXKXupZMG9tLP1ksUNd04CgwHUNp1liFJqPtwVygcvdh5N8nMfSlGVO4N32rO8R3tXTDkSC7EGmkrio5xkyRZxmqp0/Fj1g6dVJLl/roebqsC5iy+kKvM4H13g==; 24:memQDbTAYjAKbzs+UGs3nntzZjARk2rKS/HH1K4HwBbub7DEPzIOwSzJQ5nTKQfm0fo3ak58JnHkiO+1/IPqJYg6t6nj9SDFamyMDzwnG+Y= x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:SN1PR0501MB1710; x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: a8d319b3-82b5-48c8-dca4-08d320edeb90 x-ld-processed: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4,ExtAddr x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(520078)(10201501046)(3002001); SRVR:SN1PR0501MB1710; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:SN1PR0501MB1710; x-forefront-prvs: 0826B2F01B x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(979002)(6009001)(13464003)(189002)(377424004)(199003)(377454003)(33656002)(19580405001)(40100003)(15975445007)(19580395003)(105586002)(5002640100001)(10400500002)(5003600100002)(66066001)(2501003)(77096005)(5004730100002)(107886002)(106116001)(230783001)(106356001)(54356999)(76176999)(122556002)(189998001)(5001960100002)(81156007)(76576001)(2900100001)(101416001)(50986999)(2950100001)(2906002)(87936001)(99286002)(97736004)(586003)(74316001)(102836003)(1096002)(5008740100001)(6116002)(3846002)(5001770100001)(92566002)(1220700001)(86362001)(969003)(989001)(999001)(1009001)(1019001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:SN1PR0501MB1710; H:SN1PR0501MB1709.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 19 Jan 2016 16:31:01.9599 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SN1PR0501MB1710 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 16:31:05 -0000 Support. I'm not aware of any undisclosed IPR. Yours Irrespectively, John > -----Original Message----- > From: BESS [mailto:bess-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Morin > Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2016 3:51 AM > To: BESS; draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree@tools.ietf.org > Subject: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree >=20 > Hello Working Group, >=20 > This email starts a Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree= [1] > which is considered mature and ready for a final working group review. >=20 > Please read the document if you haven't read the most recent version yet = (- > 03), and send your comments to the list, no later than *February the > 2nd* (2016-02-02). >=20 > This is not only a call for comments on the document, but also a call of > support for its publication. >=20 > *Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that appli= es to > draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in > compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for mo= re > details). >=20 > *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor of draft-ietf-bes= s- > evpn-etree please respond to this email and indicate whether or not you a= re > aware of any relevant IPR. >=20 > Thank you, >=20 > Thomas/Martin >=20 > [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree >=20 > _______________________________________________ > BESS mailing list > BESS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess From nobody Tue Jan 19 22:17:55 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 842321B3444 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 10:44:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 8F1IEcaS2TrZ for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 10:44:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp-fr.alcatel-lucent.com (fr-hpgre-esg-02.alcatel-lucent.com [135.245.210.23]) (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 78A1E1B3443 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 10:44:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from fr711umx2.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (unknown [135.245.210.39]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id C6E5278950423; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 18:33:37 +0000 (GMT) Received: from fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.122]) by fr711umx2.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO-o) with ESMTP id u0JIXdoM030504 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 19 Jan 2016 18:33:40 GMT Received: from FR712WXCHHUB03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr712wxchhub03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.74]) by fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id u0JIXdA1029228 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 19 Jan 2016 19:33:39 +0100 Received: from FR711WXCHMBA01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([169.254.1.38]) by FR712WXCHHUB03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.239.2.74]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 19:33:39 +0100 From: "RABADAN, Jorge (Jorge)" To: Thomas Morin , BESS , "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree@tools.ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree Thread-Index: AQHRUpabnacTxWpDS0+60waIy2338J8Ck8YA Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 18:33:38 +0000 Message-ID: References: <569DF8F7.2000703@orange.com> In-Reply-To: <569DF8F7.2000703@orange.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/0.0.0.160109 x-originating-ip: [135.239.27.39] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <3B3F469294278C4A89FBB3CD3D09A889@exchange.lucent.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 22:17:53 -0800 Subject: Re: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 18:44:06 -0000 QXMgY28tYXV0aG9yLCBJIGZ1bGx5IHN1cHBvcnQgdGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudCBmb3IgcHVibGljYXRp b24uIA0KTm90IGF3YXJlIG9mIGFueSByZWxldmFudCBJUFIuDQoNClRoYW5rIHlvdS4NCkpvcmdl DQoNCg0KDQoNCk9uIDEvMTkvMTYsIDEyOjUxIEFNLCAiQkVTUyBvbiBiZWhhbGYgb2YgVGhvbWFz IE1vcmluIiA8YmVzcy1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3JnIG9uIGJlaGFsZiBvZiB0aG9tYXMubW9yaW5A b3JhbmdlLmNvbT4gd3JvdGU6DQoNCj5IZWxsbyBXb3JraW5nIEdyb3VwLA0KPg0KPlRoaXMgZW1h aWwgc3RhcnRzIGEgV29ya2luZyBHcm91cCBMYXN0IENhbGwgb24gDQo+ZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1iZXNz LWV2cG4tZXRyZWUgWzFdIHdoaWNoIGlzIGNvbnNpZGVyZWQgbWF0dXJlIGFuZCByZWFkeSBmb3Ig DQo+YSBmaW5hbCB3b3JraW5nIGdyb3VwIHJldmlldy4NCj4NCj5QbGVhc2UgcmVhZCB0aGUgZG9j dW1lbnQgaWYgeW91IGhhdmVuJ3QgcmVhZCB0aGUgbW9zdCByZWNlbnQgdmVyc2lvbiB5ZXQgDQo+ KC0wMyksIGFuZCBzZW5kIHlvdXIgY29tbWVudHMgdG8gdGhlIGxpc3QsIG5vIGxhdGVyIHRoYW4g KkZlYnJ1YXJ5IHRoZSANCj4ybmQqICgyMDE2LTAyLTAyKS4NCj4NCj5UaGlzIGlzIG5vdCBvbmx5 IGEgY2FsbCBmb3IgY29tbWVudHMgb24gdGhlIGRvY3VtZW50LCBidXQgYWxzbyBhIGNhbGwgb2Yg DQo+c3VwcG9ydCBmb3IgaXRzIHB1YmxpY2F0aW9uLg0KPg0KPipDb2luY2lkZW50YWxseSosIHdl IGFyZSBhbHNvIHBvbGxpbmcgZm9yIGtub3dsZWRnZSBvZiBhbnkgSVBSIHRoYXQgDQo+YXBwbGll cyB0byBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLWJlc3MtZXZwbi1ldHJlZSwgdG8gZW5zdXJlIHRoYXQgSVBSIGhhcyBi ZWVuIA0KPmRpc2Nsb3NlZCBpbiBjb21wbGlhbmNlIHdpdGggSUVURiBJUFIgcnVsZXMgKHNlZSBS RkNzIDM5NzksIDQ4NzksIDM2NjkgDQo+YW5kIDUzNzggZm9yIG1vcmUgZGV0YWlscykuDQo+DQo+ KklmKiB5b3UgYXJlIGxpc3RlZCBhcyBhIGRvY3VtZW50IGF1dGhvciBvciBjb250cmlidXRvciBv ZiANCj5kcmFmdC1pZXRmLWJlc3MtZXZwbi1ldHJlZSBwbGVhc2UgcmVzcG9uZCB0byB0aGlzIGVt YWlsIGFuZCBpbmRpY2F0ZSANCj53aGV0aGVyIG9yIG5vdCB5b3UgYXJlIGF3YXJlIG9mIGFueSBy ZWxldmFudCBJUFIuDQo+DQo+VGhhbmsgeW91LA0KPg0KPlRob21hcy9NYXJ0aW4NCj4NCj5bMV0g aHR0cHM6Ly9kYXRhdHJhY2tlci5pZXRmLm9yZy9kb2MvZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1iZXNzLWV2cG4tZXRy ZWUNCj4NCj5fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXw0K PkJFU1MgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQo+QkVTU0BpZXRmLm9yZw0KPmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3Jn L21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vYmVzcw0K From nobody Thu Jan 21 04:14:00 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E9171ACD5E for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2016 04:13:58 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 Lb3RNjAq_K7y for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2016 04:13:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp-fr.alcatel-lucent.com (fr-hpida-esg-02.alcatel-lucent.com [135.245.210.21]) (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 0EEAD1ACD92 for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2016 04:13:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from fr712umx4.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (unknown [135.245.210.45]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id A6E17642ED08A for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2016 12:13:46 +0000 (GMT) Received: from fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.42]) by fr712umx4.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO-o) with ESMTP id u0LCDnhN019638 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2016 12:13:49 GMT Received: from FR711WXCHHUB02.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr711wxchhub02.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.112]) by fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id u0LCDm6R027853 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2016 13:13:48 +0100 Received: from [135.224.199.161] (135.239.27.41) by FR711WXCHHUB02.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (135.239.2.112) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Thu, 21 Jan 2016 13:13:47 +0100 Message-ID: <56A0CB7B.5030809@alcatel-lucent.com> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 13:13:47 +0100 From: Martin Vigoureux User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: References: <568BD7CE.4060609@alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: <568BD7CE.4060609@alcatel-lucent.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [135.239.27.41] Archived-At: Subject: Re: [bess] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 12:13:58 -0000 All, the WG LC deadline is now behind us. I have only seen support for this document. We will thus proceed with submitting it to IESG. -m Le 05/01/2016 15:48, Martin Vigoureux a écrit : > Hello Working Group, > > This email starts a Working Group Last Call on > draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01 [1] which is considered mature and ready > for a final working group review. > > Please read the document if you haven't read the most recent > version yet, and send your comments to the list, no later than > *12th of January*. > > This is not only a call for comments on the document, but also a call of > support for its publication. > > *Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that > applies to draft-ietf-bess-multicast-damping, to ensure that IPR has > been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, > 3669 and 5378 for more details). > > *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor of > draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-01 please respond to this email and indicate > whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. > > Thank you, > M&T > > [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags/ > > _______________________________________________ > BESS mailing list > BESS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess > > From nobody Thu Jan 21 05:49:02 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A5C31A877F for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2016 05:49:00 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 m_ilrPlhY3zq for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2016 05:48:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp-fr.alcatel-lucent.com (fr-hpida-esg-02.alcatel-lucent.com [135.245.210.21]) (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 32F431A8753 for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2016 05:48:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from fr712umx4.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (unknown [135.245.210.45]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id 497C1D746FE17 for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2016 13:48:52 +0000 (GMT) Received: from fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.42]) by fr712umx4.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO-o) with ESMTP id u0LDmsvF008684 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2016 13:48:55 GMT Received: from FR712WXCHHUB03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr712wxchhub03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.74]) by fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id u0LDmoNq012162 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2016 14:48:54 +0100 Received: from [135.224.199.161] (135.239.27.40) by FR712WXCHHUB03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (135.239.2.74) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Thu, 21 Jan 2016 14:48:52 +0100 Message-ID: <56A0E1C4.8060004@alcatel-lucent.com> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 14:48:52 +0100 From: Martin Vigoureux User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: BESS Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [135.239.27.40] Archived-At: Subject: [bess] Conclusion on the "one implementation policy" X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 13:49:00 -0000 Working Group, Thomas and I have reviewed the comments expressed on the list since our first proposal on the subject. We consider that there is consensus to put in place the following (which is the amended proposal): At the same time we will issue a Working Group Last Call, we will ask for knowledge of existing implementations, and the more details provided at that time, the better. In the situation where an implementation exists we will proceed with submission to IESG. In the opposite situation, we will systematically ask the WG for reasoned opinions regarding whether we should nevertheless proceed with submission to IESG. We will gauge consensus on that aspect. In case consensus is in favour of proceeding with submission to IESG we will do so. In the opposite case, we will put the document in a "Waiting for implementation" state until information on an existing implementation is brought to our knowledge or of the WG. This is effective from now on. Thank you Martin and Thomas From nobody Fri Jan 22 16:27:42 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69E3C1B2DDE; Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:27:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.903 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.903 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 EL73BHtT5DiP; Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:27:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [IPv6:2001:1900:3001:11::31]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C4DD1B2DDA; Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:27:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 08B3018046A; Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:26:13 -0800 (PST) To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1005:ams_util_lib.php From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Message-Id: <20160123002613.08B3018046A@rfc-editor.org> Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:26:13 -0800 (PST) Archived-At: Cc: drafts-update-ref@iana.org, bess@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [bess] RFC 7734 on Support for Shortest Path Bridging MAC Mode over Ethernet VPN (EVPN) X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2016 00:27:39 -0000 A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 7734 Title: Support for Shortest Path Bridging MAC Mode over Ethernet VPN (EVPN) Author: D. Allan, Ed., J. Tantsura, D. Fedyk, A. Sajassi Status: Standards Track Stream: IETF Date: January 2016 Mailbox: david.i.allan@ericsson.com, jeff.tantsura@ericsson.com, don.fedyk@hpe.com, sajassi@cisco.com Pages: 11 Characters: 23512 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-bess-spbm-evpn-02.txt URL: https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7734 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17487/RFC7734 This document describes how Ethernet Shortest Path Bridging MAC mode (SPBM) can be combined with Ethernet VPN (EVPN) to interwork with Provider Backbone Bridging Provider Edges (PBB PEs) as described in the PBB-EVPN solution (RFC 7623). This is achieved via operational isolation of each Ethernet network attached to an EVPN core while supporting full interworking between the different variations of Ethernet networks. This document is a product of the BGP Enabled Services Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet Standards Track protocol for the Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the Official Internet Protocol Standards (https://www.rfc-editor.org/standards) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists. To subscribe or unsubscribe, see https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. The RFC Editor Team Association Management Solutions, LLC From nobody Fri Jan 22 16:28:55 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3260C1B2E1B; Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:28:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.909 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FS_REPLICA=0.994, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 aZGT2cPnor9L; Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:28:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB66F1B2DEB; Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:28:12 -0800 (PST) Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 64E0F180206; Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:26:53 -0800 (PST) To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1005:ams_util_lib.php From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Message-Id: <20160123002653.64E0F180206@rfc-editor.org> Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:26:53 -0800 (PST) Archived-At: Cc: drafts-update-ref@iana.org, bess@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [bess] RFC 7740 on Simulating Partial Mesh of Multipoint-to-Multipoint (MP2MP) Provider Tunnels with Ingress Replication X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2016 00:28:49 -0000 A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 7740 Title: Simulating Partial Mesh of Multipoint-to-Multipoint (MP2MP) Provider Tunnels with Ingress Replication Author: Z. Zhang, Y. Rekhter, A. Dolganow Status: Standards Track Stream: IETF Date: January 2016 Mailbox: zzhang@juniper.net, andrew.dolganow@alcatel-lucent.com Pages: 8 Characters: 18252 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-bidir-ingress-replication-04.txt URL: https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7740 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17487/RFC7740 RFC 6513 ("Multicast in MPLS/BGP IP VPNs") describes a method to support bidirectional customer multicast flows using a partial mesh of Multipoint-to-Multipoint (MP2MP) tunnels. This document specifies how a partial mesh of MP2MP tunnels can be simulated using Ingress Replication. This solution enables a service provider to use Ingress Replication to offer transparent bidirectional multicast service to its VPN customers. This document is a product of the BGP Enabled Services Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet Standards Track protocol for the Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the Official Internet Protocol Standards (https://www.rfc-editor.org/standards) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists. To subscribe or unsubscribe, see https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. The RFC Editor Team Association Management Solutions, LLC From nobody Sun Jan 24 06:47:29 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E4781A0011 for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2016 06:47:28 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 zTznhkWC3Hvu for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2016 06:47:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp-fr.alcatel-lucent.com (fr-hpgre-esg-02.alcatel-lucent.com [135.245.210.23]) (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 880B71A0010 for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2016 06:47:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from fr711umx2.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (unknown [135.245.210.39]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id 77B624C83541F for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2016 14:47:20 +0000 (GMT) Received: from fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.122]) by fr711umx2.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO-o) with ESMTP id u0OElNBk018054 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2016 14:47:23 GMT Received: from FR712WXCHHUB03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr712wxchhub03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.74]) by fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id u0OElMAM032005 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2016 15:47:23 +0100 Received: from FR711WXCHMBA07.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([169.254.3.98]) by FR712WXCHHUB03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.239.2.74]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Sun, 24 Jan 2016 15:47:13 +0100 From: "Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE)" To: "bess@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Regd. DF Election Notes Thread-Index: AQHQx2lcLBTaSxjkaUGDhnTJEICEUZ3tSaEAgRcwTQCAB2N2AA== Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2016 14:47:12 +0000 Message-ID: <368A4D35-7D83-435D-A953-FF6D006C8003@alcatel-lucent.com> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: nl-BE, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/0.0.0.151008 x-originating-ip: [135.239.27.40] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_368A4D357D83435DA953FF6D006C8003alcatellucentcom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [bess] Regd. DF Election Notes X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2016 14:47:28 -0000 --_000_368A4D357D83435DA953FF6D006C8003alcatellucentcom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 U3VwcG9ydCwgc2luY2UgdGhpcyBlbmhhbmNlcyB0aGUgREYgZWxlY3Rpb24gZm9yIEVWUE4NCg0K T24gMS8xMS8xNiwgMTowNyBBTSwgIkJFU1Mgb24gYmVoYWxmIG9mIE1hcnRpbiBWaWdvdXJldXgi IDxiZXNzLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmc8bWFpbHRvOmJlc3MtYm91bmNlc0BpZXRmLm9yZz4gb24g YmVoYWxmIG9mIG1hcnRpbi52aWdvdXJldXhAYWxjYXRlbC1sdWNlbnQuY29tPG1haWx0bzptYXJ0 aW4udmlnb3VyZXV4QGFsY2F0ZWwtbHVjZW50LmNvbT4+IHdyb3RlOg0KDQpIZWxsbyB3b3JraW5n IGdyb3VwLA0KDQpUaGlzIGVtYWlsIHN0YXJ0cyBhIHR3by13ZWVrIHBvbGwgb24gYWRvcHRpbmcN CmRyYWZ0LW1vaGFudHktYmVzcy1ldnBuLWRmLWVsZWN0aW9uLTAyIFsxXSBhcyBhIHdvcmtpbmcg Z3JvdXAgaXRlbS4NCg0KUGxlYXNlIHN0YXRlIG9uIHRoZSBsaXN0IGlmIHlvdSBzdXBwb3J0IGFk b3B0aW9uIG9yIG5vdCAoaW4gdGhlIGJvdGgNCmNhc2VzLCBwbGVhc2UgYWxzbyBzdGF0ZSB0aGUg cmVhc29ucykuDQoNClRoaXMgcG9sbCBydW5zIHVudGlsICp0aGUgMjV0aCBvZiBKYW51YXJ5Ki4N Cg0KQ3VycmVudGx5IG5vIElQUiBoYXMgYmVlbiBkaXNjbG9zZWQgYWdhaW5zdCB0aGlzIGRvY3Vt ZW50Lg0KDQoqQ29pbmNpZGVudGFsbHkqLCB3ZSBhcmUgYWxzbyBwb2xsaW5nIGZvciBrbm93bGVk Z2Ugb2YgYW55IElQUiB0aGF0DQphcHBsaWVzIHRvIHRoaXMgZHJhZnQsIHRvIGVuc3VyZSB0aGF0 IElQUiBoYXMgYmVlbiBkaXNjbG9zZWQgaW4NCmNvbXBsaWFuY2Ugd2l0aCBJRVRGIElQUiBydWxl cyAoc2VlIFJGQ3MgMzk3OSwgNDg3OSwgMzY2OQ0KYW5kIDUzNzggZm9yIG1vcmUgZGV0YWlscyku DQoNCj09PiAqSWYqIHlvdSBhcmUgbGlzdGVkIGFzIGEgZG9jdW1lbnQgYXV0aG9yIG9yIGNvbnRy aWJ1dG9yIHBsZWFzZQ0KcmVzcG9uZCB0byB0aGlzIGVtYWlsIGFuZCBpbmRpY2F0ZSB3aGV0aGVy IG9yIG5vdCB5b3UgYXJlIGF3YXJlIG9mIGFueQ0KcmVsZXZhbnQgSVBSLg0KDQpUaGUgZHJhZnQg d2lsbCBub3QgYmUgYWRvcHRlZCB1bnRpbCBhIHJlc3BvbnNlIGhhcyBiZWVuIHJlY2VpdmVkIGZy b20NCmVhY2ggYXV0aG9yIGFuZCBjb250cmlidXRvci4NCg0KSWYgeW91IGFyZSBub3QgbGlzdGVk IGFzIGFuIGF1dGhvciBvciBjb250cmlidXRvciwgdGhlbiBwbGVhc2UNCmV4cGxpY2l0bHkgcmVz cG9uZCBvbmx5IGlmIHlvdSBhcmUgYXdhcmUgb2YgYW55IElQUiB0aGF0IGhhcyBub3QgeWV0DQpi ZWVuIGRpc2Nsb3NlZCBpbiBjb25mb3JtYW5jZSB3aXRoIElFVEYgcnVsZXMuDQoNClRoYW5rIHlv dSwNCg0KTWFydGluICYgVGhvbWFzDQpiZXNzIGNoYWlycw0KDQpbMV0gaHR0cHM6Ly9kYXRhdHJh Y2tlci5pZXRmLm9yZy9kb2MvZHJhZnQtbW9oYW50eS1iZXNzLWV2cG4tZGYtZWxlY3Rpb24vDQoN Cl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQpCRVNTIG1h aWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KQkVTU0BpZXRmLm9yZzxtYWlsdG86QkVTU0BpZXRmLm9yZz4NCmh0dHBzOi8v d3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vYmVzcw0KDQpGcm9tOiAiSGVuZGVyaWNreCwg V2ltIChXaW0pIiA8d2ltLmhlbmRlcmlja3hAYWxjYXRlbC1sdWNlbnQuY29tPG1haWx0bzp3aW0u aGVuZGVyaWNreEBhbGNhdGVsLWx1Y2VudC5jb20+Pg0KRGF0ZTogU2F0dXJkYXksIEp1bHkgMjUs IDIwMTUgYXQgMTA6MjggUE0NClRvOiBzbW9oYW50eSBtb2hhbnR5IDxzYXR5YW1vaEBjaXNjby5j b208bWFpbHRvOnNhdHlhbW9oQGNpc2NvLmNvbT4+DQpTdWJqZWN0OiBSZTogUmVnZC4gREYgRWxl Y3Rpb24gTm90ZXMNCg0KSGVyZSB5b3UgZ28NCg0KRnJvbTogIlNhdHlhIE1vaGFudHkgKHNhdHlh bW9oKSINCkRhdGU6IFN1bmRheSAyNiBKdWx5IDIwMTUgMDg6MDcNClRvOiBXaW0gSGVuZGVyaWNr eA0KU3ViamVjdDogUmVnZC4gREYgRWxlY3Rpb24gTm90ZXMNCg0KSGkgV2ltLA0KDQpHb29kIHRv IHRhbGsgdG8geW91IGF0IHRoZSBhaXJwb3J0Lg0KSSBhbSBmb2xsb3dpbmcgdXAgb24gdGhlIHJl cXVlc3QgdG8gcGxlYXNlIHNlbmQgbWUgdGhlIHdyaXRldXAgcmVnYXJkaW5nIHRoZSB2YXJpb3Vz IHNlcnZpY2UgbW9kZWxzIHNlYyA2LjEg4oCTIDYuMy4NCkFib3V0IDItMyB5ZWFycyBiYWNrIHlv dSBoYWQgY2lyY3VsYXRlZCBzdWNoIGEgZGljLg0KQmVzdCB3b3VsZCBiZSBpZiB5b3XigJl2ZSBl eGFtcGxlcy4NCg0KVGhhbmtzLA0KLS1TYXR5YQ0K --_000_368A4D357D83435DA953FF6D006C8003alcatellucentcom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWw+DQo8aGVhZD4NCjxtZXRhIGh0dHAtZXF1aXY9IkNvbnRlbnQtVHlwZSIgY29udGVudD0i dGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PXV0Zi04Ij4NCjwvaGVhZD4NCjxib2R5IHN0eWxlPSJ3b3JkLXdy YXA6IGJyZWFrLXdvcmQ7IC13ZWJraXQtbmJzcC1tb2RlOiBzcGFjZTsgLXdlYmtpdC1saW5lLWJy ZWFrOiBhZnRlci13aGl0ZS1zcGFjZTsgY29sb3I6IHJnYigwLCAwLCAwKTsgZm9udC1zaXplOiAx NHB4OyBmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ2FsaWJyaSwgc2Fucy1zZXJpZjsiPg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8 ZGl2PlN1cHBvcnQsIHNpbmNlIHRoaXMgZW5oYW5jZXMgdGhlIERGIGVsZWN0aW9uIGZvciBFVlBO PC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPHNwYW4gaWQ9Ik9MS19TUkNfQk9EWV9TRUNUSU9OIj4N CjxkaXY+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJ3b3JkLXdyYXA6IGJyZWFrLXdvcmQ7IC13ZWJraXQtbmJzcC1t b2RlOiBzcGFjZTsgLXdlYmtpdC1saW5lLWJyZWFrOiBhZnRlci13aGl0ZS1zcGFjZTsgY29sb3I6 IHJnYigwLCAwLCAwKTsgZm9udC1zaXplOiAxNHB4OyBmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ2FsaWJyaSwgc2Fu cy1zZXJpZjsiPg0KPGRpdj48YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pk9uIDEvMTEvMTYsIDE6 MDcgQU0sICZxdW90O0JFU1Mgb24gYmVoYWxmIG9mIE1hcnRpbiBWaWdvdXJldXgmcXVvdDsgJmx0 OzxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpiZXNzLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmciPmJlc3MtYm91bmNlc0BpZXRm Lm9yZzwvYT4mbmJzcDtvbiBiZWhhbGYgb2YmbmJzcDs8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86bWFydGluLnZp Z291cmV1eEBhbGNhdGVsLWx1Y2VudC5jb20iPm1hcnRpbi52aWdvdXJldXhAYWxjYXRlbC1sdWNl bnQuY29tPC9hPiZndDsgd3JvdGU6PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pjxicj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGJsb2NrcXVv dGUgaWQ9Ik1BQ19PVVRMT09LX0FUVFJJQlVUSU9OX0JMT0NLUVVPVEUiIHN0eWxlPSJib3JkZXIt bGVmdC1jb2xvcjogcmdiKDE4MSwgMTk2LCAyMjMpOyBib3JkZXItbGVmdC13aWR0aDogNXB4OyBi b3JkZXItbGVmdC1zdHlsZTogc29saWQ7IHBhZGRpbmc6IDBweCAwcHggMHB4IDVweDsgbWFyZ2lu OiAwcHggMHB4IDBweCA1cHg7Ij4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiBDb25zb2xhcywg bW9ub3NwYWNlOyBmb250LXNpemU6IDEycHg7Ij5IZWxsbyB3b3JraW5nIGdyb3VwLDwvZGl2Pg0K PGRpdiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IENvbnNvbGFzLCBtb25vc3BhY2U7IGZvbnQtc2l6ZTog MTJweDsiPjxicj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IENvbnNvbGFzLCBt b25vc3BhY2U7IGZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMTJweDsiPlRoaXMgZW1haWwgc3RhcnRzIGEgdHdvLXdlZWsg cG9sbCBvbiBhZG9wdGluZzwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IENvbnNvbGFz LCBtb25vc3BhY2U7IGZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMTJweDsiPmRyYWZ0LW1vaGFudHktYmVzcy1ldnBuLWRm LWVsZWN0aW9uLTAyIFsxXSBhcyBhIHdvcmtpbmcgZ3JvdXAgaXRlbS48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5 bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiBDb25zb2xhcywgbW9ub3NwYWNlOyBmb250LXNpemU6IDEycHg7Ij48 YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiBDb25zb2xhcywgbW9ub3NwYWNl OyBmb250LXNpemU6IDEycHg7Ij5QbGVhc2Ugc3RhdGUgb24gdGhlIGxpc3QgaWYgeW91IHN1cHBv cnQgYWRvcHRpb24gb3Igbm90IChpbiB0aGUgYm90aCZuYnNwOzwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0i Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IENvbnNvbGFzLCBtb25vc3BhY2U7IGZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMTJweDsiPmNhc2Vz LCBwbGVhc2UgYWxzbyBzdGF0ZSB0aGUgcmVhc29ucykuPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJmb250 LWZhbWlseTogQ29uc29sYXMsIG1vbm9zcGFjZTsgZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMnB4OyI+PGJyPg0KPC9k aXY+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ29uc29sYXMsIG1vbm9zcGFjZTsgZm9udC1z aXplOiAxMnB4OyI+VGhpcyBwb2xsIHJ1bnMgdW50aWwgKnRoZSAyNXRoIG9mIEphbnVhcnkqLjwv ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IENvbnNvbGFzLCBtb25vc3BhY2U7IGZvbnQt c2l6ZTogMTJweDsiPjxicj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IENvbnNv bGFzLCBtb25vc3BhY2U7IGZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMTJweDsiPkN1cnJlbnRseSBubyBJUFIgaGFzIGJl ZW4gZGlzY2xvc2VkIGFnYWluc3QgdGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudC48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImZv bnQtZmFtaWx5OiBDb25zb2xhcywgbW9ub3NwYWNlOyBmb250LXNpemU6IDEycHg7Ij48YnI+DQo8 L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiBDb25zb2xhcywgbW9ub3NwYWNlOyBmb250 LXNpemU6IDEycHg7Ij4qQ29pbmNpZGVudGFsbHkqLCB3ZSBhcmUgYWxzbyBwb2xsaW5nIGZvciBr bm93bGVkZ2Ugb2YgYW55IElQUiB0aGF0PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJmb250LWZhbWlseTog Q29uc29sYXMsIG1vbm9zcGFjZTsgZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMnB4OyI+YXBwbGllcyB0byB0aGlzIGRy YWZ0LCB0byBlbnN1cmUgdGhhdCBJUFIgaGFzIGJlZW4gZGlzY2xvc2VkIGluPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2 IHN0eWxlPSJmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ29uc29sYXMsIG1vbm9zcGFjZTsgZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMnB4 OyI+Y29tcGxpYW5jZSB3aXRoIElFVEYgSVBSIHJ1bGVzIChzZWUgUkZDcyAzOTc5LCA0ODc5LCAz NjY5PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ29uc29sYXMsIG1vbm9zcGFjZTsg Zm9udC1zaXplOiAxMnB4OyI+YW5kIDUzNzggZm9yIG1vcmUgZGV0YWlscykuPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2 IHN0eWxlPSJmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ29uc29sYXMsIG1vbm9zcGFjZTsgZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMnB4 OyI+PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ29uc29sYXMsIG1vbm9z cGFjZTsgZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMnB4OyI+PT0mZ3Q7ICpJZiogeW91IGFyZSBsaXN0ZWQgYXMgYSBk b2N1bWVudCBhdXRob3Igb3IgY29udHJpYnV0b3IgcGxlYXNlPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJm b250LWZhbWlseTogQ29uc29sYXMsIG1vbm9zcGFjZTsgZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMnB4OyI+cmVzcG9u ZCB0byB0aGlzIGVtYWlsIGFuZCBpbmRpY2F0ZSB3aGV0aGVyIG9yIG5vdCB5b3UgYXJlIGF3YXJl IG9mIGFueSZuYnNwOzwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IENvbnNvbGFzLCBt b25vc3BhY2U7IGZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMTJweDsiPnJlbGV2YW50IElQUi48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5 bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiBDb25zb2xhcywgbW9ub3NwYWNlOyBmb250LXNpemU6IDEycHg7Ij48 YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiBDb25zb2xhcywgbW9ub3NwYWNl OyBmb250LXNpemU6IDEycHg7Ij5UaGUgZHJhZnQgd2lsbCBub3QgYmUgYWRvcHRlZCB1bnRpbCBh IHJlc3BvbnNlIGhhcyBiZWVuIHJlY2VpdmVkIGZyb208L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQt ZmFtaWx5OiBDb25zb2xhcywgbW9ub3NwYWNlOyBmb250LXNpemU6IDEycHg7Ij5lYWNoIGF1dGhv ciBhbmQgY29udHJpYnV0b3IuPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ29uc29s YXMsIG1vbm9zcGFjZTsgZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMnB4OyI+PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxl PSJmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ29uc29sYXMsIG1vbm9zcGFjZTsgZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMnB4OyI+SWYg eW91IGFyZSBub3QgbGlzdGVkIGFzIGFuIGF1dGhvciBvciBjb250cmlidXRvciwgdGhlbiBwbGVh c2UmbmJzcDs8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiBDb25zb2xhcywgbW9ub3Nw YWNlOyBmb250LXNpemU6IDEycHg7Ij5leHBsaWNpdGx5IHJlc3BvbmQgb25seSBpZiB5b3UgYXJl IGF3YXJlIG9mIGFueSBJUFIgdGhhdCBoYXMgbm90IHlldCZuYnNwOzwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHls ZT0iZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IENvbnNvbGFzLCBtb25vc3BhY2U7IGZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMTJweDsiPmJl ZW4gZGlzY2xvc2VkIGluIGNvbmZvcm1hbmNlIHdpdGggSUVURiBydWxlcy48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYg c3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiBDb25zb2xhcywgbW9ub3NwYWNlOyBmb250LXNpemU6IDEycHg7 Ij48YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiBDb25zb2xhcywgbW9ub3Nw YWNlOyBmb250LXNpemU6IDEycHg7Ij5UaGFuayB5b3UsPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJmb250 LWZhbWlseTogQ29uc29sYXMsIG1vbm9zcGFjZTsgZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMnB4OyI+PGJyPg0KPC9k aXY+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ29uc29sYXMsIG1vbm9zcGFjZTsgZm9udC1z aXplOiAxMnB4OyI+TWFydGluICZhbXA7IFRob21hczwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1m YW1pbHk6IENvbnNvbGFzLCBtb25vc3BhY2U7IGZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMTJweDsiPmJlc3MgY2hhaXJz PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ29uc29sYXMsIG1vbm9zcGFjZTsgZm9u dC1zaXplOiAxMnB4OyI+PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ29u c29sYXMsIG1vbm9zcGFjZTsgZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMnB4OyI+WzFdJm5ic3A7PGEgaHJlZj0iaHR0 cHM6Ly9kYXRhdHJhY2tlci5pZXRmLm9yZy9kb2MvZHJhZnQtbW9oYW50eS1iZXNzLWV2cG4tZGYt ZWxlY3Rpb24vIj5odHRwczovL2RhdGF0cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3JnL2RvYy9kcmFmdC1tb2hhbnR5 LWJlc3MtZXZwbi1kZi1lbGVjdGlvbi88L2E+PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJmb250LWZhbWls eTogQ29uc29sYXMsIG1vbm9zcGFjZTsgZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMnB4OyI+PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8 ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ29uc29sYXMsIG1vbm9zcGFjZTsgZm9udC1zaXplOiAx MnB4OyI+X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX188L2Rp dj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiBDb25zb2xhcywgbW9ub3NwYWNlOyBmb250LXNp emU6IDEycHg7Ij5CRVNTIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdDwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1mYW1p bHk6IENvbnNvbGFzLCBtb25vc3BhY2U7IGZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMTJweDsiPjxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0 bzpCRVNTQGlldGYub3JnIj5CRVNTQGlldGYub3JnPC9hPjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0iZm9u dC1mYW1pbHk6IENvbnNvbGFzLCBtb25vc3BhY2U7IGZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMTJweDsiPjxhIGhyZWY9 Imh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vYmVzcyI+aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cu aWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9iZXNzPC9hPjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj48YnI+DQo8L2Rp dj4NCjwvYmxvY2txdW90ZT4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPHNwYW4gaWQ9Ik9MS19TUkNfQk9EWV9TRUNUSU9O Ij4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OkNhbGlicmk7IGZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMXB0OyB0ZXh0 LWFsaWduOmxlZnQ7IGNvbG9yOmJsYWNrOyBCT1JERVItQk9UVE9NOiBtZWRpdW0gbm9uZTsgQk9S REVSLUxFRlQ6IG1lZGl1bSBub25lOyBQQURESU5HLUJPVFRPTTogMGluOyBQQURESU5HLUxFRlQ6 IDBpbjsgUEFERElORy1SSUdIVDogMGluOyBCT1JERVItVE9QOiAjYjVjNGRmIDFwdCBzb2xpZDsg Qk9SREVSLVJJR0hUOiBtZWRpdW0gbm9uZTsgUEFERElORy1UT1A6IDNwdCI+DQo8c3BhbiBzdHls ZT0iZm9udC13ZWlnaHQ6Ym9sZCI+RnJvbTogPC9zcGFuPiZxdW90O0hlbmRlcmlja3gsIFdpbSAo V2ltKSZxdW90OyAmbHQ7PGEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOndpbS5oZW5kZXJpY2t4QGFsY2F0ZWwtbHVj ZW50LmNvbSI+d2ltLmhlbmRlcmlja3hAYWxjYXRlbC1sdWNlbnQuY29tPC9hPiZndDs8YnI+DQo8 c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC13ZWlnaHQ6Ym9sZCI+RGF0ZTogPC9zcGFuPlNhdHVyZGF5LCBKdWx5 IDI1LCAyMDE1IGF0IDEwOjI4IFBNPGJyPg0KPHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtd2VpZ2h0OmJvbGQi PlRvOiA8L3NwYW4+c21vaGFudHkgbW9oYW50eSAmbHQ7PGEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOnNhdHlhbW9o QGNpc2NvLmNvbSI+c2F0eWFtb2hAY2lzY28uY29tPC9hPiZndDs8YnI+DQo8c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0i Zm9udC13ZWlnaHQ6Ym9sZCI+U3ViamVjdDogPC9zcGFuPlJlOiBSZWdkLiBERiBFbGVjdGlvbiBO b3Rlczxicj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj48YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxibG9ja3F1b3RlIGlkPSJNQUNf T1VUTE9PS19BVFRSSUJVVElPTl9CTE9DS1FVT1RFIiBzdHlsZT0iQk9SREVSLUxFRlQ6ICNiNWM0 ZGYgNSBzb2xpZDsgUEFERElORzowIDAgMCA1OyBNQVJHSU46MCAwIDAgNTsiPg0KPGRpdj4NCjxk aXYgc3R5bGU9IndvcmQtd3JhcDogYnJlYWstd29yZDsgLXdlYmtpdC1uYnNwLW1vZGU6IHNwYWNl OyAtd2Via2l0LWxpbmUtYnJlYWs6IGFmdGVyLXdoaXRlLXNwYWNlOyBjb2xvcjogcmdiKDAsIDAs IDApOyBmb250LXNpemU6IDE0cHg7IGZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiBDYWxpYnJpLCBzYW5zLXNlcmlmOyI+ DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj5IZXJlIHlvdSBnbzwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXYgaWQ9IiI+PC9kaXY+ DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj48YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxzcGFuIGlkPSJPTEtfU1JDX0JP RFlfU0VDVElPTiI+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJmb250LWZhbWlseTpDYWxpYnJpOyBmb250LXNpemU6 MTJwdDsgdGV4dC1hbGlnbjpsZWZ0OyBjb2xvcjpibGFjazsgQk9SREVSLUJPVFRPTTogbWVkaXVt IG5vbmU7IEJPUkRFUi1MRUZUOiBtZWRpdW0gbm9uZTsgUEFERElORy1CT1RUT006IDBpbjsgUEFE RElORy1MRUZUOiAwaW47IFBBRERJTkctUklHSFQ6IDBpbjsgQk9SREVSLVRPUDogI2I1YzRkZiAx cHQgc29saWQ7IEJPUkRFUi1SSUdIVDogbWVkaXVtIG5vbmU7IFBBRERJTkctVE9QOiAzcHQiPg0K PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtd2VpZ2h0OmJvbGQiPkZyb206IDwvc3Bhbj4mcXVvdDtTYXR5YSBN b2hhbnR5IChzYXR5YW1vaCkmcXVvdDs8YnI+DQo8c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC13ZWlnaHQ6Ym9s ZCI+RGF0ZTogPC9zcGFuPlN1bmRheSAyNiBKdWx5IDIwMTUgMDg6MDc8YnI+DQo8c3BhbiBzdHls ZT0iZm9udC13ZWlnaHQ6Ym9sZCI+VG86IDwvc3Bhbj5XaW0gSGVuZGVyaWNreDxicj4NCjxzcGFu IHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXdlaWdodDpib2xkIj5TdWJqZWN0OiA8L3NwYW4+UmVnZC4gREYgRWxlY3Rp b24gTm90ZXM8YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHls ZT0id29yZC13cmFwOiBicmVhay13b3JkOyAtd2Via2l0LW5ic3AtbW9kZTogc3BhY2U7IC13ZWJr aXQtbGluZS1icmVhazogYWZ0ZXItd2hpdGUtc3BhY2U7IGNvbG9yOiByZ2IoMCwgMCwgMCk7IGZv bnQtc2l6ZTogMTRweDsgZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IENhbGlicmksIHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7ICI+DQo8ZGl2 PkhpIFdpbSw8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pkdvb2QgdG8gdGFsayB0byB5 b3UgYXQgdGhlIGFpcnBvcnQuPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2PkkgYW0gZm9sbG93aW5nIHVwIG9uIHRoZSBy ZXF1ZXN0IHRvIHBsZWFzZSBzZW5kIG1lIHRoZSB3cml0ZXVwIHJlZ2FyZGluZyB0aGUgdmFyaW91 cyBzZXJ2aWNlIG1vZGVscyBzZWMgNi4xIOKAkyA2LjMuPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2PkFib3V0IDItMyB5 ZWFycyBiYWNrIHlvdSBoYWQgY2lyY3VsYXRlZCBzdWNoIGEgZGljLjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj5CZXN0 IHdvdWxkIGJlIGlmIHlvdeKAmXZlIGV4YW1wbGVzLjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj48YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4N CjxkaXY+VGhhbmtzLDwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4tLVNhdHlhPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0K PC9zcGFuPjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Jsb2NrcXVvdGU+DQo8L3NwYW4+PC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rp dj4NCjwvc3Bhbj4NCjwvYm9keT4NCjwvaHRtbD4NCg== --_000_368A4D357D83435DA953FF6D006C8003alcatellucentcom_-- From nobody Sun Jan 24 13:41:30 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B1D11B336E for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2016 13:41:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=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 yl8PMsEswh5v for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2016 13:41:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pa0-x231.google.com (mail-pa0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0181B1B336F for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2016 13:41:26 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pa0-x231.google.com with SMTP id cy9so70019347pac.0 for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2016 13:41:25 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=DHXxpu4swixEiLcbDS0CwzF/7NxXUXKIyXfUkjqB+wA=; b=Ktd52OFoy+1J3xKxZssv4BqSa05K5vBVPegcikLJtbkJtkopO7l0fxiJWeh9+3nvfd UqIE7cwIC13Wsx7enAPLAGwAT+CRXEg9sCUufNYlT+GnJlHFU5qty7kQ1Qa5ndxiNoiU qesaM8ph8vvi/9d8XpEs41llGuwPaDuUsPE5DBO2ygQ0CzC+2ZgQK0EouZgkCwbhAlcD mWG3kxUulZ65LNJ1P1y1+XwzYaPDdsyWkNr8qAcRNo1q5294/TG9AXfgKtopaCDjxYgY UwoZdpquNOoMC3b6I9Vxx7MV4eQq/x5WUWe1RjxQaV9u72VleiAhEeUW3h/x3DbTLi6N SDyQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:content-type:mime-version:subject:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references :to; bh=DHXxpu4swixEiLcbDS0CwzF/7NxXUXKIyXfUkjqB+wA=; b=A2Nxlf00qgJQ79mZceV5IVoth7ZpzlG+ZrO9UHMWxXytuMTik1eKxpgAFkpeyTFl8g vIPWugE+WuNzA67Rm+srfiQ+9CBEYcue6JMb3H10yjIlb7YMTE5FS+RG7EbNDuKxSUqp 98vBkwri3mU6io4VpS4bwjPqJ18pHalYiJ7YVRraAc+cxrl/a6PPzeYQPL9TxK3/ZfJ/ aFMiwOu/juObcGZdrB7ucrRor4z7ZtMikMhFD9FQywVwI7QzbQ5nc5aBKRz/93potZHr dmfOmDAl1Jq3v8mk2WGyxFwhYMTBAt6lXP7u19XqczdE4O9rap/1x72PsvDZaKgAYgw0 Wakg== X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOTduvUaNSv7hbGO654AXpwPDO0P33mo0TdRfQUnJdvy+qkTIh4v15i0hhWZtsGDhA== X-Received: by 10.66.140.79 with SMTP id re15mr20576667pab.127.1453671685638; Sun, 24 Jan 2016 13:41:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from [22.48.52.34] ([172.56.16.70]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z15sm23531491pfa.71.2016.01.24.13.41.24 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 24 Jan 2016 13:41:24 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-F8A3418C-B0FF-4E86-84A9-4B61C096B717 Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) From: Sami Boutros X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (12B466) In-Reply-To: <368A4D35-7D83-435D-A953-FF6D006C8003@alcatel-lucent.com> Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2016 13:41:23 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <1CF0C41A-8942-44E2-BC61-CD08BF876BFA@gmail.com> References: <368A4D35-7D83-435D-A953-FF6D006C8003@alcatel-lucent.com> To: "Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE)" Archived-At: Cc: "bess@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [bess] Regd. DF Election Notes X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2016 21:41:29 -0000 --Apple-Mail-F8A3418C-B0FF-4E86-84A9-4B61C096B717 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Same here Thanks, Sami Sent from my iPhone > On Jan 24, 2016, at 6:47 AM, Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE) wrote: >=20 > Support, since this enhances the DF election for EVPN >=20 > On 1/11/16, 1:07 AM, "BESS on behalf of Martin Vigoureux" wrote: >=20 > Hello working group, >=20 > This email starts a two-week poll on adopting > draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 [1] as a working group item. >=20 > Please state on the list if you support adoption or not (in the both=20 > cases, please also state the reasons). >=20 > This poll runs until *the 25th of January*. >=20 > Currently no IPR has been disclosed against this document. >=20 > *Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that > applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in > compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 > and 5378 for more details). >=20 > =3D=3D> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please > respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any=20 > relevant IPR. >=20 > The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from > each author and contributor. >=20 > If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please=20 > explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet=20 > been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. >=20 > Thank you, >=20 > Martin & Thomas > bess chairs >=20 > [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election/ >=20 > _______________________________________________ > BESS mailing list > BESS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess >=20 > From: "Henderickx, Wim (Wim)" > Date: Saturday, July 25, 2015 at 10:28 PM > To: smohanty mohanty > Subject: Re: Regd. DF Election Notes >=20 > Here you go >=20 > From: "Satya Mohanty (satyamoh)" > Date: Sunday 26 July 2015 08:07 > To: Wim Henderickx > Subject: Regd. DF Election Notes >=20 > Hi Wim, >=20 > Good to talk to you at the airport. > I am following up on the request to please send me the writeup regarding t= he various service models sec 6.1 =E2=80=93 6.3. > About 2-3 years back you had circulated such a dic. > Best would be if you=E2=80=99ve examples. >=20 > Thanks, > --Satya > _______________________________________________ > BESS mailing list > BESS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess --Apple-Mail-F8A3418C-B0FF-4E86-84A9-4B61C096B717 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Same here

Tha= nks,

Sami

Sent from my iPhone

= On Jan 24, 2016, at 6:47 AM, Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE) <wim.henderickx@nokia.com> wrote:
Support, since this enhances the DF election for EVPN

On 1/11/16, 1:07 AM, "BESS on behalf of Martin Vigoureux" <bess-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of&n= bsp;martin.vigoureux@= alcatel-lucent.com> wrote:

Hello work= ing group,

This email= starts a two-week poll on adopting
draft-moha= nty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 [1] as a working group item.

Please sta= te on the list if you support adoption or not (in the both 
cases, ple= ase also state the reasons).

This poll r= uns until *the 25th of January*.

Currently n= o IPR has been disclosed against this document.

*Coinciden= tally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that
applies to= this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in
compliance= with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669
and 5378 f= or more details).

=3D=3D>= *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please
respond to= this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any 
relevant I= PR.

The draft w= ill not be adopted until a response has been received from
each autho= r and contributor.

If you are= not listed as an author or contributor, then please 
explicitly= respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet 
been discl= osed in conformance with IETF rules.

Thank you,=

Martin &am= p; Thomas
bess chair= s

[1] <= a href=3D"https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-electi= on/">https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election/

__________= _____________________________________
BESS maili= ng list

From: "Henderickx, Wim (Wim)" <wim.henderickx@alcatel-lu= cent.com>
Date: Saturday, July 25, 2015 at 10:= 28 PM
To: smohanty mohanty <satyamoh@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Regd. DF Election Notes=

Here you go

From: "Satya Mohanty (satyamoh)"
= Date: Sunday 26 July 2015 08:07
To: Wim Henderickx
Subject: Regd. DF Election Notes
=

Hi Wim,

Good to talk to you at the airport.
I am following up on the request to please send me the writeup regardin= g the various service models sec 6.1 =E2=80=93 6.3.
About 2-3 years back you had circulated such a dic.
Best would be if you=E2=80=99ve examples.

Thanks,
--Satya
____________________= ___________________________
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman= /listinfo/bess
= --Apple-Mail-F8A3418C-B0FF-4E86-84A9-4B61C096B717-- From nobody Sun Jan 24 21:40:34 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8AB61A8857 for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2016 21:40:32 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.502 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.502 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, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 gqdw3KEE8qIk for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2016 21:40:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 59B6C1A8853 for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2016 21:40:31 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1404; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1453700431; x=1454910031; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-id:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=zV2wrD2dcUGtOdNFL2KJly1TGt0RF+xoWPkUgQiGCKA=; b=bRGLhqvb8a6gEkL6JFvsZHd6Kj0HHRLRpavuATRRcVnIMGSkTzjA/Tgk luxvLCoGFlhrDDlUwTgaauDMb9O9Uo3idAa+mc5FO19juEoQl6OpDILbH HEaCRexrR263UcFBEqiOKQHGaJZhDsIBvXDt/7HgLAquFvPwckxpIJOZL A=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0D5AQD1tKVW/5tdJa1egzpSbQaIUbIKA?= =?us-ascii?q?Q2BYhgKhW0CgS04FAEBAQEBAQGBCoRCAQEEAQEBGlEbAgEIRicLJQIEARKIGw6?= =?us-ascii?q?8VwEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARQEix+EGxEBhFkFjWKJFAGFRYgQgV6ERIMnh?= =?us-ascii?q?TCKbINSAR4BAUKDaWqGDDR8AQEB?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,343,1449532800"; d="scan'208";a="64538701" Received: from rcdn-core-4.cisco.com ([173.37.93.155]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 25 Jan 2016 05:40:30 +0000 Received: from XCH-RTP-004.cisco.com (xch-rtp-004.cisco.com [64.101.220.144]) by rcdn-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u0P5eUkT026564 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 25 Jan 2016 05:40:30 GMT Received: from xch-rtp-005.cisco.com (64.101.220.145) by XCH-RTP-004.cisco.com (64.101.220.144) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 00:40:29 -0500 Received: from xch-rtp-005.cisco.com ([64.101.220.145]) by XCH-RTP-005.cisco.com ([64.101.220.145]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 00:40:29 -0500 From: "Ali Sajassi (sajassi)" To: "thomas.morin@orange.com" , BESS , "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree@tools.ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree Thread-Index: AQHRUpaOE/U9KT8MU0ut9l7k3idEc58LjlAA Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 05:40:29 +0000 Message-ID: References: <569DF8F7.2000703@orange.com> In-Reply-To: <569DF8F7.2000703@orange.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.5.8.151023 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.19.76.53] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-ID: <9039267155DACB43B9046DB8CBB21761@emea.cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 05:40:33 -0000 Support publication of this document as a co-author and I am not aware of any IPR that hasn=B9t been disclosed. Cheers, Ali On 1/19/16, 12:51 AM, "BESS on behalf of thomas.morin@orange.com" wrote: >Hello Working Group, > >This email starts a Working Group Last Call on >draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree [1] which is considered mature and ready for >a final working group review. > >Please read the document if you haven't read the most recent version yet >(-03), and send your comments to the list, no later than *February the >2nd* (2016-02-02). > >This is not only a call for comments on the document, but also a call of >support for its publication. > >*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that >applies to draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree, to ensure that IPR has been >disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 >and 5378 for more details). > >*If* you are listed as a document author or contributor of >draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree please respond to this email and indicate >whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. > >Thank you, > >Thomas/Martin > >[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree > >_______________________________________________ >BESS mailing list >BESS@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess From nobody Mon Jan 25 03:25:10 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A78B01A8A8C for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 03:25:09 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=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 TUqHDcLEh4-b for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 03:25:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ob0-x234.google.com (mail-ob0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3E3AC1A8A89 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 03:25:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ob0-x234.google.com with SMTP id is5so113142918obc.0 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 03:25:08 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=reply-to:from:to:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:thread-index :content-language; bh=AF5BzhcfIkOuqLrODkccj9P02MJGGlIXxZjP9vg+L7A=; b=uUCZCxLF86rBpUBY1LSDMW7nqnrCn4RppqF6JIx6of9QMNc3r/hQ5R7Ey0IP9fx+au jZcLNBtsbeFLdxzR1Xznk+hdJutQMR9bGoO8FweIr2uhaapLQ+9o+992vJnHHeRQYgR2 71Z7DUC8HneEuvGT40YF31Rq+wnPzbB8ZBEBqoqnKVYZMg6BD6Bo31HqyF1nLkeLv4iC 0jNhjIehxiCGvpj9EpCskzzTersQyw4zq/objEwPW3Fa+oufFy2sSCojpIb0T+2P0/Qb VjEXndQbMz+RhbnaY2Br3nLCd2k2jFWtPu2y7LaCoRDwXz/4fG5R+VQrYDkcRKDKtOlQ YjOw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:reply-to:from:to:references:in-reply-to:subject :date:message-id:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :thread-index:content-language; bh=AF5BzhcfIkOuqLrODkccj9P02MJGGlIXxZjP9vg+L7A=; b=fcczn9Xmwn4zWuwev7SBnXdWqlPKOS+mZzx5rvIr5AanExzcD0J5qEqaxSbmwZ07rQ ZfTu8m0zsNDLLnq2DBYipddE91JkLGRmOC7X6C4dYbvVyHCmUpC7bW7LXcoVmYaKHuHk To/BLchWeAPbQsWa0D2oC4JuLE6KpKtW4PZQMbqxhYH/GjbBm6VnMQuAGWYTJXEImD9i XwDvq9qkoTNyfZ1+/ED+jNguLz1sTccN8Omf7iv0hQGdGaQBtUbBw2TE+SU9VumQIvxr AMTvi2I01oJPsn3LrTL3QGJP4j0oNbcVWTg8gJhuqaY4anfDcyUt8NQ85ybsBF8IngUv XEhA== X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YORn4hhwqEZePRGWN0QdrxTaRRMPmZneYIWJLY1+VaK0A06rp357gPIV2WJxHIFXjA== X-Received: by 10.182.18.8 with SMTP id s8mr13281480obd.43.1453721107561; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 03:25:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from XLR8R ([2602:304:cccd:4ae0:1d3d:9e4f:2308:9699]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w6sm10239647obx.9.2016.01.25.03.25.06 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 25 Jan 2016 03:25:06 -0800 (PST) From: "Luay" To: "'Thomas Morin'" , "'BESS'" , References: <569DF8F7.2000703@orange.com> In-Reply-To: <569DF8F7.2000703@orange.com> Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 05:25:06 -0600 Message-ID: <000301d15763$0b0c4f70$2124ee50$@com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: AdFSlowhwjuHNnlWSYqNBxXXyEQ7HQEzGcZw Content-Language: en-us Archived-At: Subject: Re: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: luayjalil@gmail.com List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 11:25:09 -0000 Support Thanks, Luay -----Original Message----- From: BESS [mailto:bess-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Morin Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2016 2:51 AM To: BESS; draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree@tools.ietf.org Subject: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree Hello Working Group, This email starts a Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree [1] which is considered mature and ready for a final working group review. Please read the document if you haven't read the most recent version yet (-03), and send your comments to the list, no later than *February the 2nd* (2016-02-02). This is not only a call for comments on the document, but also a call of support for its publication. *Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that applies to draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree please respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. Thank you, Thomas/Martin [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree _______________________________________________ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess From nobody Mon Jan 25 06:43:10 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 462461B2B37 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 06:43:09 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 Hbl7x5ba1IjS for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 06:43:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bl2on0104.outbound.protection.outlook.com [65.55.169.104]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C4051B2B07 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 06:43:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from BY1PR0501MB1240.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.160.200.139) by BY1PR0501MB1239.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.160.200.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.365.19; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 14:43:01 +0000 Received: from BY1PR0501MB1240.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.160.200.139]) by BY1PR0501MB1240.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.160.200.139]) with mapi id 15.01.0365.024; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 14:43:01 +0000 From: Wen Lin To: "bess@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [bess] Regd. DF Election Notes Thread-Index: AQHRV36wLBTaSxjkaUGDhnTJEICEUQ== Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 14:43:01 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.5.5.150821 authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=wlin@juniper.net; x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.14] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BY1PR0501MB1239; 5:fDBnpY4DW9+NypEylCaptfdWwY2xwfXMLh1FtAtoqtHxWSi06sGdOWu4FOecg/7yfMgM//8JAE83rHOm5ZcPXJVCv+5btsQhUtpiaAnjqEukYb2NzHlDxodnrQdykj22n/M7+Yr+2VfkOKE+lOxjCw==; 24:KZpNFTF/Cj/RruOVtKQRpiFlwN8spfs99nJqCA3am00FmMQOUDyvk0nDE/PF/H3ZAv8tuYb1/UlRFRS7QzR8jEGnwRYU7G6LiaoQc0oP+RI= x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BY1PR0501MB1239; x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 47cc44be-9d59-4bb4-4243-08d32595d358 x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(61489475475257)(95692535739014); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(520078)(10201501046)(3002001); SRVR:BY1PR0501MB1239; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BY1PR0501MB1239; x-forefront-prvs: 083289FD26 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(979002)(479174004)(377454003)(24454002)(164054003)(189002)(199003)(5001960100002)(15975445007)(3846002)(54356999)(1096002)(110136002)(102836003)(1220700001)(77096005)(2900100001)(107886002)(2351001)(11100500001)(106356001)(105586002)(50986999)(5002640100001)(106116001)(5008740100001)(3280700002)(586003)(66066001)(97736004)(16236675004)(4001350100001)(19617315012)(6116002)(81156007)(99286002)(101416001)(189998001)(19580395003)(19580405001)(1730700002)(2906002)(122556002)(87936001)(83506001)(10400500002)(36756003)(450100001)(2501003)(5004730100002)(40100003)(86362001)(92566002)(969003)(989001)(999001)(1009001)(1019001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BY1PR0501MB1239; H:BY1PR0501MB1240.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_D2CB9E506ED1Cwlinjunipernet_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 25 Jan 2016 14:43:01.4565 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY1PR0501MB1239 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [bess] Regd. DF Election Notes X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 14:43:09 -0000 --_000_D2CB9E506ED1Cwlinjunipernet_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +1 Thanks, Wen From: BESS > on behalf = of "Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE)" > Date: Sunday, January 24, 2016 at 9:47 AM To: "bess@ietf.org" > Subject: Re: [bess] Regd. DF Election Notes Support, since this enhances the DF election for EVPN On 1/11/16, 1:07 AM, "BESS on behalf of Martin Vigoureux" on behalf of martin.vigoureux@alcatel-l= ucent.com> wrote: Hello working group, This email starts a two-week poll on adopting draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 [1] as a working group item. Please state on the list if you support adoption or not (in the both cases, please also state the reasons). This poll runs until *the 25th of January*. Currently no IPR has been disclosed against this document. *Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). =3D=3D> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from each author and contributor. If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. Thank you, Martin & Thomas bess chairs [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election/ _______________________________________________ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess From: "Henderickx, Wim (Wim)" > Date: Saturday, July 25, 2015 at 10:28 PM To: smohanty mohanty > Subject: Re: Regd. DF Election Notes Here you go From: "Satya Mohanty (satyamoh)" Date: Sunday 26 July 2015 08:07 To: Wim Henderickx Subject: Regd. DF Election Notes Hi Wim, Good to talk to you at the airport. I am following up on the request to please send me the writeup regarding th= e various service models sec 6.1 - 6.3. About 2-3 years back you had circulated such a dic. Best would be if you've examples. Thanks, --Satya --_000_D2CB9E506ED1Cwlinjunipernet_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-ID: <48C8098E68CAE147BB182BCB089BC8B9@namprd05.prod.outlook.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
+1 

Thanks,
Wen

From: BESS <bess-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of "Hende= rickx, Wim (Nokia - BE)" <wim.henderickx@nokia.com>
Date: Sunday, January 24, 2016 at 9= :47 AM
To: "bess@ietf.org" <bess@i= etf.org>
Subject: Re: [bess] Regd. DF Electi= on Notes

Support, since this enhances the DF election for EVPN

On 1/11/16, 1:07 AM, "BESS on behalf of Martin Vigoureux" &l= t;bess-bounces@ietf.org o= n behalf of mar= tin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com> wrote:

Hello wor= king group,

This emai= l starts a two-week poll on adopting
draft-moh= anty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 [1] as a working group item.

Please st= ate on the list if you support adoption or not (in the both 
cases, pl= ease also state the reasons).

This poll= runs until *the 25th of January*.

Currently= no IPR has been disclosed against this document.

*Coincide= ntally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that
applies t= o this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in
complianc= e with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669
and 5378 = for more details).

=3D=3D>= ; *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please
respond t= o this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any 
relevant = IPR.

The draft= will not be adopted until a response has been received from
each auth= or and contributor.

If you ar= e not listed as an author or contributor, then please 
explicitl= y respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet 
been disc= losed in conformance with IETF rules.

Thank you= ,

Martin &a= mp; Thomas
bess chai= rs


_________= ______________________________________
BESS mail= ing list

From: "Henderickx, Wim (Wim)&q= uot; <wim.henderick= x@alcatel-lucent.com>
Date: Saturday, July 25, 2015 at 10= :28 PM
To: smohanty mohanty <satyamoh@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Regd. DF Election Note= s

Here you go

From: "Satya Mohanty (satyamoh= )"
Date: Sunday 26 July 2015 08:07
To: Wim Henderickx
Subject: Regd. DF Election Notes

Hi Wim,

Good to talk to you at the airport.
I am following up on the request to please send me the writeup regardi= ng the various service models sec 6.1 – 6.3.
About 2-3 years back you had circulated such a dic.
Best would be if you’ve examples.

Thanks,
--Satya
 --_000_D2CB9E506ED1Cwlinjunipernet_-- From nobody Mon Jan 25 06:46:57 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D25981B2B5A for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 06:46:54 -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 pxDPIH24zbnI for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 06:46:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1on0719.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::719]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 174051B2B57 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 06:46:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from BY1PR0501MB1240.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.160.200.139) by BY1PR0501MB1239.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.160.200.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.365.19; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 14:46:30 +0000 Received: from BY1PR0501MB1240.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.160.200.139]) by BY1PR0501MB1240.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.160.200.139]) with mapi id 15.01.0365.024; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 14:46:31 +0000 From: Wen Lin To: "EXT - thomas.morin@orange.com" , 'BESS' , "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree@tools.ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree Thread-Index: AQHRUpaMzcjABno9jUueH1/1rziD0Z8MIOcA///kdAA= Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 14:46:30 +0000 Message-ID: References: <569DF8F7.2000703@orange.com> <000301d15763$0b0c4f70$2124ee50$@com> In-Reply-To: <000301d15763$0b0c4f70$2124ee50$@com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.5.5.150821 authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=wlin@juniper.net; x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.14] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BY1PR0501MB1239; 5:CmhYdxocyDznVMs5RJJSmT2z1/u6lMM87NBJWQgVgMp1+9iPUAvrtybNgbkjavGW7KvMtUZvUA52oytemXF3J2Grbi8R8FRrnP/2rPBTzUGECF02V7VIPGyqaxMPYZCpNfCAUjjwTMgQoJzY5tIEqg==; 24:bmJDCL/cYPeOzx9vEglX7RKQyxq/BtYuWd37BNX8TpLzc6XFJj54mvv9UcAcZYqKfBoeOzq0Ru1S46uDfGZtgCWo3rWKNVHb9fC1MAa8QrQ= x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BY1PR0501MB1239; x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 91c1373a-a883-4d1d-c88f-08d32596504a x-ld-processed: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4,ExtAddr x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(520078)(10201501046)(3002001); SRVR:BY1PR0501MB1239; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BY1PR0501MB1239; x-forefront-prvs: 083289FD26 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(377454003)(164054003)(377424004)(189002)(199003)(13464003)(5001960100002)(15975445007)(3846002)(2950100001)(54356999)(1096002)(102836003)(1220700001)(77096005)(2900100001)(107886002)(106356001)(105586002)(50986999)(5002640100001)(106116001)(5008740100001)(3280700002)(76176999)(586003)(66066001)(5001770100001)(97736004)(4001350100001)(6116002)(81156007)(99286002)(101416001)(189998001)(19580395003)(19580405001)(2906002)(122556002)(87936001)(83506001)(10400500002)(36756003)(230783001)(2501003)(5004730100002)(40100003)(86362001)(92566002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BY1PR0501MB1239; H:BY1PR0501MB1240.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <1103D5E31F302E4AB9C3D8059D217A95@namprd05.prod.outlook.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 25 Jan 2016 14:46:30.9584 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY1PR0501MB1239 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 14:46:55 -0000 Fully support as a co-author. I am not aware of any un-disclosed IPR. Thanks, Wen > >-----Original Message----- >From: BESS [mailto:bess-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Morin >Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2016 2:51 AM >To: BESS; draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree@tools.ietf.org >Subject: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree > >Hello Working Group, > >This email starts a Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree >[1] which is considered mature and ready for a final working group review. > >Please read the document if you haven't read the most recent version yet >(-03), and send your comments to the list, no later than *February the >2nd* (2016-02-02). > >This is not only a call for comments on the document, but also a call of >support for its publication. > >*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that >applies >to draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in >compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for >more >details). > >*If* you are listed as a document author or contributor of >draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree please respond to this email and indicate >whether >or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. > >Thank you, > >Thomas/Martin > >[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree > >_______________________________________________ >BESS mailing list >BESS@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess > >_______________________________________________ >BESS mailing list >BESS@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess From nobody Mon Jan 25 07:07:40 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31CC41B2BD4 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 07:07:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.265 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.265 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, KHOP_DYNAMIC=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 3a5yeqkJc12n for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 07:07:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.149.140]) (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 B2AA01B2BCC for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 07:07:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0049295.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049295.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.15.0.59/8.15.0.59) with SMTP id u0PF3OnQ031801; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 10:07:37 -0500 Received: from alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp7.sbc.com [144.160.229.24]) by m0049295.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 20m6c72wtr-1 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 25 Jan 2016 10:07:37 -0500 Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u0PF7XE5003942; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 10:07:36 -0500 Received: from mlpi407.sfdc.sbc.com (mlpi407.sfdc.sbc.com [130.9.128.239]) by alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u0PF7MhV003508 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 25 Jan 2016 10:07:27 -0500 Received: from MISOUT7MSGHUBAC.ITServices.sbc.com (MISOUT7MSGHUBAC.itservices.sbc.com [130.9.129.147]) by mlpi407.sfdc.sbc.com (RSA Interceptor); Mon, 25 Jan 2016 15:07:12 GMT Received: from MISOUT7MSGUSRCD.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.4.217]) by MISOUT7MSGHUBAC.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.9.129.147]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 10:07:12 -0500 From: "UTTARO, JAMES" To: "'Wen Lin'" , "'EXT - thomas.morin@orange.com'" , "'BESS'" , "'draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree@tools.ietf.org'" Thread-Topic: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree Thread-Index: AdFSlowhE/U9KT8MU0ut9l7k3idEcwEzGcZwABGIrwAACceEsA== Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 15:07:11 +0000 Message-ID: References: <569DF8F7.2000703@orange.com> <000301d15763$0b0c4f70$2124ee50$@com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.70.33.217] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-RSA-Inspected: yes X-RSA-Classifications: public X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2016-01-25_07:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1507310008 definitions=main-1601250246 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 15:07:39 -0000 Fully support as co-author, no IRP that I am aware of. Thanks, Jim Uttaro -----Original Message----- From: BESS [mailto:bess-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Wen Lin Sent: Monday, January 25, 2016 9:47 AM To: EXT - thomas.morin@orange.com; 'BESS'; draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree@tools= .ietf.org Subject: Re: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree Fully support as a co-author. I am not aware of any un-disclosed IPR. Thanks, Wen > >-----Original Message----- >From: BESS [mailto:bess-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Morin >Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2016 2:51 AM >To: BESS; draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree@tools.ietf.org >Subject: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree > >Hello Working Group, > >This email starts a Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree >[1] which is considered mature and ready for a final working group review. > >Please read the document if you haven't read the most recent version yet >(-03), and send your comments to the list, no later than *February the >2nd* (2016-02-02). > >This is not only a call for comments on the document, but also a call of >support for its publication. > >*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that >applies >to draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in >compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for >more >details). > >*If* you are listed as a document author or contributor of >draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree please respond to this email and indicate >whether >or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. > >Thank you, > >Thomas/Martin > >[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree > >_______________________________________________ >BESS mailing list >BESS@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess > >_______________________________________________ >BESS mailing list >BESS@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess _______________________________________________ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess From nobody Mon Jan 25 09:34:48 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3A851B35A5 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 09:34:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 vbRa9HnBLTEq for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 09:34:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from usplmg20.ericsson.net (usplmg20.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 7EDF71B3229 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 09:34:43 -0800 (PST) X-AuditID: c618062d-f79d16d000001b1c-be-56a659f86bdb Received: from EUSAAHC007.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [147.117.188.93]) by usplmg20.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id BC.97.06940.8F956A65; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 18:23:04 +0100 (CET) Received: from EUSAAMB103.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.120]) by EUSAAHC007.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.93]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:34:41 -0500 From: Antoni Przygienda To: "Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE)" , "bess@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Regd. DF Election Notes Thread-Index: AQHQx2lcLBTaSxjkaUGDhnTJEICEUZ3tSaEAgRcwTQCAB2N2AIABwG1A Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 17:34:41 +0000 Message-ID: <2E4BB27CAB87BF43B4207C0E55860F180EB70AB8@eusaamb103.ericsson.se> References: <368A4D35-7D83-435D-A953-FF6D006C8003@alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: <368A4D35-7D83-435D-A953-FF6D006C8003@alcatel-lucent.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [147.117.188.9] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_2E4BB27CAB87BF43B4207C0E55860F180EB70AB8eusaamb103erics_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFupgkeLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42KZXLonVvdH5LIwg1/nNS1WHJ/JbDHp9yYW ByaPJUt+MnncvXWJKYApissmJTUnsyy1SN8ugStjzYcdTAV7zjJWnJkzi7GBseUEYxcjJ4eE gInE1kmH2CBsMYkL99YD2VwcQgJHGCUOrG2GcpYzSmyZ08ICUsUmYCFx+dtTZhBbRCBB4tf/ t2BxYQEViV1/ZrJCxFUlXn9bDmRzANluEiuPK4KEWYDCu7rXMYGEeQV8JWb8UIAYf5ZRYt6+ mewgNZxA5dP/9zGB2IxAB30/tQbMZhYQl7j1ZD4TxKECEkv2nGeGsEUlXj7+xwphK0rs65/O DlGfL7FhxV2wJ3kFBCVOznzCMoFRZBaSUbOQlM1CUjYL6DxmAU2J9bv0IUoUJaZ0P2SHsDUk WufMZUcWX8DIvoqRo7S4ICc33chgEyMwfo5JsOnuYLw/3fMQowAHoxIPb0H40jAh1sSy4src Q4wSHMxKIrz/+ZaFCfGmJFZWpRblxxeV5qQWH2KU5mBREue14V0UJiSQnliSmp2aWpBaBJNl 4uCUamCcGsvo+11rnYrdY4d/djFsV7cfMPJvm1Z3o3Bpq5uk5+MZfQXKx3TteFdfj5lQdzT6 9wOtC//l+Ez1XWZPtd4rdjHYR7yh+W+KgI3ZQc7jp5vVNnVI6d93LJ7so+h75Uxf90nOvWFx S9IKZwRH3Wo++WqBY7B4Kcsl1dTW2l8zFmW6NuTs9FdiKc5INNRiLipOBAAw76yfmwIAAA== Archived-At: Subject: Re: [bess] Regd. DF Election Notes X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 17:34:46 -0000 --_000_2E4BB27CAB87BF43B4207C0E55860F180EB70AB8eusaamb103erics_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 c3VwcG9ydCBhcyB3ZWxsIChhcyBjby1hdXRob3IpLCBubyBJUFIgSeKAmW0gYXdhcmUgb2YNCg0K dGhhbmtzDQoNCi0tLSB0b255DQpfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX18NCuKAnFNpbXBsZSwgY2xlYXIgcHVycG9zZSBhbmQgcHJpbmNpcGxlcyBnaXZlIHJp c2UgdG8gY29tcGxleCBhbmQgaW50ZWxsaWdlbnQgYmVoYXZpb3IuIENvbXBsZXggcnVsZXMgYW5k IHJlZ3VsYXRpb25zIGdpdmUgcmlzZSB0byBzaW1wbGUgYW5kIHN0dXBpZCBiZWhhdmlvci7igJ0N Ci0tLSBEZWUgSG9jaw0KDQpGcm9tOiBCRVNTIFttYWlsdG86YmVzcy1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3Jn XSBPbiBCZWhhbGYgT2YgSGVuZGVyaWNreCwgV2ltIChOb2tpYSAtIEJFKQ0KU2VudDogU3VuZGF5 LCBKYW51YXJ5IDI0LCAyMDE2IDY6NDcgQU0NClRvOiBiZXNzQGlldGYub3JnDQpTdWJqZWN0OiBS ZTogW2Jlc3NdIFJlZ2QuIERGIEVsZWN0aW9uIE5vdGVzDQoNClN1cHBvcnQsIHNpbmNlIHRoaXMg ZW5oYW5jZXMgdGhlIERGIGVsZWN0aW9uIGZvciBFVlBODQoNCk9uIDEvMTEvMTYsIDE6MDcgQU0s ICJCRVNTIG9uIGJlaGFsZiBvZiBNYXJ0aW4gVmlnb3VyZXV4IiA8YmVzcy1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYu b3JnPG1haWx0bzpiZXNzLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmc+IG9uIGJlaGFsZiBvZiBtYXJ0aW4udmln b3VyZXV4QGFsY2F0ZWwtbHVjZW50LmNvbTxtYWlsdG86bWFydGluLnZpZ291cmV1eEBhbGNhdGVs LWx1Y2VudC5jb20+PiB3cm90ZToNCg0KSGVsbG8gd29ya2luZyBncm91cCwNCg0KVGhpcyBlbWFp bCBzdGFydHMgYSB0d28td2VlayBwb2xsIG9uIGFkb3B0aW5nDQpkcmFmdC1tb2hhbnR5LWJlc3Mt ZXZwbi1kZi1lbGVjdGlvbi0wMiBbMV0gYXMgYSB3b3JraW5nIGdyb3VwIGl0ZW0uDQoNClBsZWFz ZSBzdGF0ZSBvbiB0aGUgbGlzdCBpZiB5b3Ugc3VwcG9ydCBhZG9wdGlvbiBvciBub3QgKGluIHRo ZSBib3RoDQpjYXNlcywgcGxlYXNlIGFsc28gc3RhdGUgdGhlIHJlYXNvbnMpLg0KDQpUaGlzIHBv bGwgcnVucyB1bnRpbCAqdGhlIDI1dGggb2YgSmFudWFyeSouDQoNCkN1cnJlbnRseSBubyBJUFIg aGFzIGJlZW4gZGlzY2xvc2VkIGFnYWluc3QgdGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudC4NCg0KKkNvaW5jaWRlbnRh bGx5Kiwgd2UgYXJlIGFsc28gcG9sbGluZyBmb3Iga25vd2xlZGdlIG9mIGFueSBJUFIgdGhhdA0K YXBwbGllcyB0byB0aGlzIGRyYWZ0LCB0byBlbnN1cmUgdGhhdCBJUFIgaGFzIGJlZW4gZGlzY2xv c2VkIGluDQpjb21wbGlhbmNlIHdpdGggSUVURiBJUFIgcnVsZXMgKHNlZSBSRkNzIDM5NzksIDQ4 NzksIDM2NjkNCmFuZCA1Mzc4IGZvciBtb3JlIGRldGFpbHMpLg0KDQo9PT4gKklmKiB5b3UgYXJl IGxpc3RlZCBhcyBhIGRvY3VtZW50IGF1dGhvciBvciBjb250cmlidXRvciBwbGVhc2UNCnJlc3Bv bmQgdG8gdGhpcyBlbWFpbCBhbmQgaW5kaWNhdGUgd2hldGhlciBvciBub3QgeW91IGFyZSBhd2Fy ZSBvZiBhbnkNCnJlbGV2YW50IElQUi4NCg0KVGhlIGRyYWZ0IHdpbGwgbm90IGJlIGFkb3B0ZWQg dW50aWwgYSByZXNwb25zZSBoYXMgYmVlbiByZWNlaXZlZCBmcm9tDQplYWNoIGF1dGhvciBhbmQg Y29udHJpYnV0b3IuDQoNCklmIHlvdSBhcmUgbm90IGxpc3RlZCBhcyBhbiBhdXRob3Igb3IgY29u dHJpYnV0b3IsIHRoZW4gcGxlYXNlDQpleHBsaWNpdGx5IHJlc3BvbmQgb25seSBpZiB5b3UgYXJl IGF3YXJlIG9mIGFueSBJUFIgdGhhdCBoYXMgbm90IHlldA0KYmVlbiBkaXNjbG9zZWQgaW4gY29u Zm9ybWFuY2Ugd2l0aCBJRVRGIHJ1bGVzLg0KDQpUaGFuayB5b3UsDQoNCk1hcnRpbiAmIFRob21h cw0KYmVzcyBjaGFpcnMNCg0KWzFdIGh0dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0Zi5vcmcvZG9jL2Ry YWZ0LW1vaGFudHktYmVzcy1ldnBuLWRmLWVsZWN0aW9uLw0KDQpfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXw0KQkVTUyBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QNCkJFU1NAaWV0 Zi5vcmc8bWFpbHRvOkJFU1NAaWV0Zi5vcmc+DQpodHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFu L2xpc3RpbmZvL2Jlc3MNCg0KRnJvbTogIkhlbmRlcmlja3gsIFdpbSAoV2ltKSIgPHdpbS5oZW5k ZXJpY2t4QGFsY2F0ZWwtbHVjZW50LmNvbTxtYWlsdG86d2ltLmhlbmRlcmlja3hAYWxjYXRlbC1s dWNlbnQuY29tPj4NCkRhdGU6IFNhdHVyZGF5LCBKdWx5IDI1LCAyMDE1IGF0IDEwOjI4IFBNDQpU bzogc21vaGFudHkgbW9oYW50eSA8c2F0eWFtb2hAY2lzY28uY29tPG1haWx0bzpzYXR5YW1vaEBj aXNjby5jb20+Pg0KU3ViamVjdDogUmU6IFJlZ2QuIERGIEVsZWN0aW9uIE5vdGVzDQoNCkhlcmUg eW91IGdvDQoNCkZyb206ICJTYXR5YSBNb2hhbnR5IChzYXR5YW1vaCkiDQpEYXRlOiBTdW5kYXkg MjYgSnVseSAyMDE1IDA4OjA3DQpUbzogV2ltIEhlbmRlcmlja3gNClN1YmplY3Q6IFJlZ2QuIERG IEVsZWN0aW9uIE5vdGVzDQoNCkhpIFdpbSwNCg0KR29vZCB0byB0YWxrIHRvIHlvdSBhdCB0aGUg YWlycG9ydC4NCkkgYW0gZm9sbG93aW5nIHVwIG9uIHRoZSByZXF1ZXN0IHRvIHBsZWFzZSBzZW5k IG1lIHRoZSB3cml0ZXVwIHJlZ2FyZGluZyB0aGUgdmFyaW91cyBzZXJ2aWNlIG1vZGVscyBzZWMg Ni4xIOKAkyA2LjMuDQpBYm91dCAyLTMgeWVhcnMgYmFjayB5b3UgaGFkIGNpcmN1bGF0ZWQgc3Vj aCBhIGRpYy4NCkJlc3Qgd291bGQgYmUgaWYgeW914oCZdmUgZXhhbXBsZXMuDQoNClRoYW5rcywN Ci0tU2F0eWENCg== --_000_2E4BB27CAB87BF43B4207C0E55860F180EB70AB8eusaamb103erics_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWwgeG1sbnM6dj0idXJuOnNjaGVtYXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTp2bWwiIHhtbG5zOm89InVy bjpzY2hlbWFzLW1pY3Jvc29mdC1jb206b2ZmaWNlOm9mZmljZSIgeG1sbnM6dz0idXJuOnNjaGVt YXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTpvZmZpY2U6d29yZCIgeG1sbnM6bT0iaHR0cDovL3NjaGVtYXMubWlj cm9zb2Z0LmNvbS9vZmZpY2UvMjAwNC8xMi9vbW1sIiB4bWxucz0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy53My5vcmcv VFIvUkVDLWh0bWw0MCI+DQo8aGVhZD4NCjxtZXRhIGh0dHAtZXF1aXY9IkNvbnRlbnQtVHlwZSIg Y29udGVudD0idGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PXV0Zi04Ij4NCjxtZXRhIG5hbWU9IkdlbmVyYXRv ciIgY29udGVudD0iTWljcm9zb2Z0IFdvcmQgMTQgKGZpbHRlcmVkIG1lZGl1bSkiPg0KPHN0eWxl PjwhLS0NCi8qIEZvbnQgRGVmaW5pdGlvbnMgKi8NCkBmb250LWZhY2UNCgl7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6 Q2FsaWJyaTsNCglwYW5vc2UtMToyIDE1IDUgMiAyIDIgNCAzIDIgNDt9DQpAZm9udC1mYWNlDQoJ e2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OlRhaG9tYTsNCglwYW5vc2UtMToyIDExIDYgNCAzIDUgNCA0IDIgNDt9DQpA Zm9udC1mYWNlDQoJe2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJFcmFzIERlbWkgSVRDIjsNCglwYW5vc2UtMToyIDEx IDggNSAzIDUgNCAyIDggNDt9DQpAZm9udC1mYWNlDQoJe2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OkNvbnNvbGFzOw0K CXBhbm9zZS0xOjIgMTEgNiA5IDIgMiA0IDMgMiA0O30NCi8qIFN0eWxlIERlZmluaXRpb25zICov DQpwLk1zb05vcm1hbCwgbGkuTXNvTm9ybWFsLCBkaXYuTXNvTm9ybWFsDQoJe21hcmdpbjowaW47 DQoJbWFyZ2luLWJvdHRvbTouMDAwMXB0Ow0KCWZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMi4wcHQ7DQoJZm9udC1mYW1p bHk6IlRpbWVzIE5ldyBSb21hbiIsInNlcmlmIjt9DQphOmxpbmssIHNwYW4uTXNvSHlwZXJsaW5r DQoJe21zby1zdHlsZS1wcmlvcml0eTo5OTsNCgljb2xvcjpibHVlOw0KCXRleHQtZGVjb3JhdGlv bjp1bmRlcmxpbmU7fQ0KYTp2aXNpdGVkLCBzcGFuLk1zb0h5cGVybGlua0ZvbGxvd2VkDQoJe21z by1zdHlsZS1wcmlvcml0eTo5OTsNCgljb2xvcjpwdXJwbGU7DQoJdGV4dC1kZWNvcmF0aW9uOnVu ZGVybGluZTt9DQpwLk1zb0FjZXRhdGUsIGxpLk1zb0FjZXRhdGUsIGRpdi5Nc29BY2V0YXRlDQoJ e21zby1zdHlsZS1wcmlvcml0eTo5OTsNCgltc28tc3R5bGUtbGluazoiQmFsbG9vbiBUZXh0IENo YXIiOw0KCW1hcmdpbjowaW47DQoJbWFyZ2luLWJvdHRvbTouMDAwMXB0Ow0KCWZvbnQtc2l6ZTo4 LjBwdDsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseToiVGFob21hIiwic2Fucy1zZXJpZiI7fQ0Kc3Bhbi5FbWFpbFN0 eWxlMTcNCgl7bXNvLXN0eWxlLXR5cGU6cGVyc29uYWwtcmVwbHk7DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IkNh bGlicmkiLCJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIjsNCgljb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEO30NCnNwYW4uQmFsbG9vblRleHRD aGFyDQoJe21zby1zdHlsZS1uYW1lOiJCYWxsb29uIFRleHQgQ2hhciI7DQoJbXNvLXN0eWxlLXBy aW9yaXR5Ojk5Ow0KCW1zby1zdHlsZS1saW5rOiJCYWxsb29uIFRleHQiOw0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5 OiJUYWhvbWEiLCJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIjt9DQouTXNvQ2hwRGVmYXVsdA0KCXttc28tc3R5bGUtdHlw ZTpleHBvcnQtb25seTsNCglmb250LXNpemU6MTAuMHB0O30NCkBwYWdlIFdvcmRTZWN0aW9uMQ0K CXtzaXplOjguNWluIDExLjBpbjsNCgltYXJnaW46MS4waW4gMS4waW4gMS4waW4gMS4waW47fQ0K ZGl2LldvcmRTZWN0aW9uMQ0KCXtwYWdlOldvcmRTZWN0aW9uMTt9DQotLT48L3N0eWxlPjwhLS1b aWYgZ3RlIG1zbyA5XT48eG1sPg0KPG86c2hhcGVkZWZhdWx0cyB2OmV4dD0iZWRpdCIgc3BpZG1h eD0iMTAyNiIgLz4NCjwveG1sPjwhW2VuZGlmXS0tPjwhLS1baWYgZ3RlIG1zbyA5XT48eG1sPg0K PG86c2hhcGVsYXlvdXQgdjpleHQ9ImVkaXQiPg0KPG86aWRtYXAgdjpleHQ9ImVkaXQiIGRhdGE9 IjEiIC8+DQo8L286c2hhcGVsYXlvdXQ+PC94bWw+PCFbZW5kaWZdLS0+DQo8L2hlYWQ+DQo8Ym9k eSBsYW5nPSJFTi1VUyIgbGluaz0iYmx1ZSIgdmxpbms9InB1cnBsZSI+DQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSJX b3JkU2VjdGlvbjEiPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6 ZToxMS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNlcmlm JnF1b3Q7O2NvbG9yOiMxRjQ5N0QiPnN1cHBvcnQgYXMgd2VsbCAoYXMgY28tYXV0aG9yKSwgbm8g SVBSIEnigJltIGF3YXJlIG9mDQo8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNv Tm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjExLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtD YWxpYnJpJnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYmcXVvdDs7Y29sb3I6IzFGNDk3RCI+PG86cD4m bmJzcDs8L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9Im1zby1lbGVtZW50OnBh cmEtYm9yZGVyLWRpdjtib3JkZXI6bm9uZTtib3JkZXItYm90dG9tOnNvbGlkIHdpbmRvd3RleHQg MS4wcHQ7cGFkZGluZzowaW4gMGluIDEuMHB0IDBpbiI+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBz dHlsZT0iYm9yZGVyOm5vbmU7cGFkZGluZzowaW4iPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTAu MHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90 Oztjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+dGhhbmtzDQo8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0i TXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0iYm9yZGVyOm5vbmU7cGFkZGluZzowaW4iPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJm b250LXNpemU6MTAuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fu cy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0K PHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9ImJvcmRlcjpub25lO3BhZGRpbmc6MGluIj48Yj48 c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjEwLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtDYWxpYnJpJnF1 b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYmcXVvdDs7Y29sb3I6YmxhY2siPi0tLSB0b255PC9zcGFuPjwv Yj48Yj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjEwLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtFcmFz IERlbWkgSVRDJnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYmcXVvdDs7Y29sb3I6YmxhY2siPjxvOnA+ PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvYj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0iYm9yZGVy Om5vbmU7cGFkZGluZzowaW4iPjxiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTAuMHB0O2ZvbnQt ZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0VyYXMgRGVtaSBJVEMmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztj b2xvcjpibGFjayI+X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f PG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9iPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiIHN0eWxlPSJi b3JkZXI6bm9uZTtwYWRkaW5nOjBpbiI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTo5LjBwdDtjb2xv cjojMUY0OTdEIj7igJxTaW1wbGUsIGNsZWFyIHB1cnBvc2UgYW5kIHByaW5jaXBsZXMgZ2l2ZSBy aXNlIHRvIGNvbXBsZXggYW5kIGludGVsbGlnZW50IGJlaGF2aW9yLiBDb21wbGV4IHJ1bGVzIGFu ZCByZWd1bGF0aW9ucyBnaXZlIHJpc2UgdG8gc2ltcGxlIGFuZCBzdHVwaWQgYmVoYXZpb3Iu4oCd DQo8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0iYm9y ZGVyOm5vbmU7cGFkZGluZzowaW4iPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6OS4wcHQ7Y29sb3I6 IzFGNDk3RCI+LS0tDQo8Yj5EZWUgSG9jazwvYj4gPG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9k aXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6 MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZx dW90Oztjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEIj48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8ZGl2IHN0 eWxlPSJib3JkZXI6bm9uZTtib3JkZXItbGVmdDpzb2xpZCBibHVlIDEuNXB0O3BhZGRpbmc6MGlu IDBpbiAwaW4gNC4wcHQiPg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImJvcmRlcjpub25lO2JvcmRlci10 b3A6c29saWQgI0I1QzRERiAxLjBwdDtwYWRkaW5nOjMuMHB0IDBpbiAwaW4gMGluIj4NCjxwIGNs YXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTAuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFt aWx5OiZxdW90O1RhaG9tYSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7Ij5Gcm9tOjwvc3Bh bj48L2I+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMC4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7VGFo b21hJnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYmcXVvdDsiPiBCRVNTIFttYWlsdG86YmVzcy1ib3Vu Y2VzQGlldGYub3JnXQ0KPGI+T24gQmVoYWxmIE9mIDwvYj5IZW5kZXJpY2t4LCBXaW0gKE5va2lh IC0gQkUpPGJyPg0KPGI+U2VudDo8L2I+IFN1bmRheSwgSmFudWFyeSAyNCwgMjAxNiA2OjQ3IEFN PGJyPg0KPGI+VG86PC9iPiBiZXNzQGlldGYub3JnPGJyPg0KPGI+U3ViamVjdDo8L2I+IFJlOiBb YmVzc10gUmVnZC4gREYgRWxlY3Rpb24gTm90ZXM8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rp dj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3A+DQo8 ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9u dC1zaXplOjEwLjVwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtDYWxpYnJpJnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMt c2VyaWYmcXVvdDs7Y29sb3I6YmxhY2siPlN1cHBvcnQsIHNpbmNlIHRoaXMgZW5oYW5jZXMgdGhl IERGIGVsZWN0aW9uIGZvciBFVlBOPG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rp dj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNw YW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMC41cHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90 OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7O2NvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwv c3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNw YW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMC41cHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90 OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7O2NvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj5PbiAxLzExLzE2LCAxOjA3IEFN LCAmcXVvdDtCRVNTIG9uIGJlaGFsZiBvZiBNYXJ0aW4gVmlnb3VyZXV4JnF1b3Q7ICZsdDs8YSBo cmVmPSJtYWlsdG86YmVzcy1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3JnIj5iZXNzLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmc8 L2E+Jm5ic3A7b24gYmVoYWxmIG9mJm5ic3A7PGEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOm1hcnRpbi52aWdvdXJl dXhAYWxjYXRlbC1sdWNlbnQuY29tIj5tYXJ0aW4udmlnb3VyZXV4QGFsY2F0ZWwtbHVjZW50LmNv bTwvYT4mZ3Q7DQogd3JvdGU6PG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0K PHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMC41cHQ7Zm9udC1m YW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7O2NvbG9yOmJs YWNrIj48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxibG9ja3F1b3RlIHN0 eWxlPSJib3JkZXI6bm9uZTtib3JkZXItbGVmdDpzb2xpZCAjQjVDNERGIDQuNXB0O3BhZGRpbmc6 MGluIDBpbiAwaW4gNC4wcHQ7bWFyZ2luLWxlZnQ6My43NXB0O21hcmdpbi1yaWdodDowaW4iIGlk PSJNQUNfT1VUTE9PS19BVFRSSUJVVElPTl9CTE9DS1FVT1RFIj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0i TXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjkuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OkNvbnNv bGFzO2NvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj5IZWxsbyB3b3JraW5nIGdyb3VwLDxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwv cD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250 LXNpemU6OS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6Q29uc29sYXM7Y29sb3I6YmxhY2siPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7 PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxz cGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6OS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6Q29uc29sYXM7Y29sb3I6Ymxh Y2siPlRoaXMgZW1haWwgc3RhcnRzIGEgdHdvLXdlZWsgcG9sbCBvbiBhZG9wdGluZzxvOnA+PC9v OnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFu IHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6OS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6Q29uc29sYXM7Y29sb3I6YmxhY2si PmRyYWZ0LW1vaGFudHktYmVzcy1ldnBuLWRmLWVsZWN0aW9uLTAyIFsxXSBhcyBhIHdvcmtpbmcg Z3JvdXAgaXRlbS48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFz cz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjkuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OkNv bnNvbGFzO2NvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4N CjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjkuMHB0 O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OkNvbnNvbGFzO2NvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj5QbGVhc2Ugc3RhdGUgb24gdGhlIGxp c3QgaWYgeW91IHN1cHBvcnQgYWRvcHRpb24gb3Igbm90IChpbiB0aGUgYm90aCZuYnNwOzxvOnA+ PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxz cGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6OS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6Q29uc29sYXM7Y29sb3I6Ymxh Y2siPmNhc2VzLCBwbGVhc2UgYWxzbyBzdGF0ZSB0aGUgcmVhc29ucykuPG86cD48L286cD48L3Nw YW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9 ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTo5LjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTpDb25zb2xhcztjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+PG86cD4m bmJzcDs8L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1h bCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTo5LjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTpDb25zb2xhcztjb2xv cjpibGFjayI+VGhpcyBwb2xsIHJ1bnMgdW50aWwgKnRoZSAyNXRoIG9mIEphbnVhcnkqLjxvOnA+ PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxz cGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6OS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6Q29uc29sYXM7Y29sb3I6Ymxh Y2siPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNz PSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6OS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6Q29u c29sYXM7Y29sb3I6YmxhY2siPkN1cnJlbnRseSBubyBJUFIgaGFzIGJlZW4gZGlzY2xvc2VkIGFn YWluc3QgdGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudC48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+ DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjkuMHB0O2ZvbnQt ZmFtaWx5OkNvbnNvbGFzO2NvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+ DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1z aXplOjkuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OkNvbnNvbGFzO2NvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj4qQ29pbmNpZGVudGFs bHkqLCB3ZSBhcmUgYWxzbyBwb2xsaW5nIGZvciBrbm93bGVkZ2Ugb2YgYW55IElQUiB0aGF0PG86 cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+ PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTo5LjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTpDb25zb2xhcztjb2xvcjpi bGFjayI+YXBwbGllcyB0byB0aGlzIGRyYWZ0LCB0byBlbnN1cmUgdGhhdCBJUFIgaGFzIGJlZW4g ZGlzY2xvc2VkIGluPG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xh c3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTo5LjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTpD b25zb2xhcztjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+Y29tcGxpYW5jZSB3aXRoIElFVEYgSVBSIHJ1bGVzIChzZWUg UkZDcyAzOTc5LCA0ODc5LCAzNjY5PG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2 Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTo5LjBwdDtmb250 LWZhbWlseTpDb25zb2xhcztjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+YW5kIDUzNzggZm9yIG1vcmUgZGV0YWlscyku PG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1h bCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTo5LjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTpDb25zb2xhcztjb2xv cjpibGFjayI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAg Y2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTo5LjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWls eTpDb25zb2xhcztjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+PT0mZ3Q7ICpJZiogeW91IGFyZSBsaXN0ZWQgYXMgYSBk b2N1bWVudCBhdXRob3Igb3IgY29udHJpYnV0b3IgcGxlYXNlPG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9w Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQt c2l6ZTo5LjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTpDb25zb2xhcztjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+cmVzcG9uZCB0byB0 aGlzIGVtYWlsIGFuZCBpbmRpY2F0ZSB3aGV0aGVyIG9yIG5vdCB5b3UgYXJlIGF3YXJlIG9mIGFu eSZuYnNwOzxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJN c29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6OS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6Q29uc29s YXM7Y29sb3I6YmxhY2siPnJlbGV2YW50IElQUi48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rp dj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjku MHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OkNvbnNvbGFzO2NvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwv c3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHls ZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjkuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OkNvbnNvbGFzO2NvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj5UaGUg ZHJhZnQgd2lsbCBub3QgYmUgYWRvcHRlZCB1bnRpbCBhIHJlc3BvbnNlIGhhcyBiZWVuIHJlY2Vp dmVkIGZyb208bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0i TXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjkuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OkNvbnNv bGFzO2NvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj5lYWNoIGF1dGhvciBhbmQgY29udHJpYnV0b3IuPG86cD48L286cD48 L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5 bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTo5LjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTpDb25zb2xhcztjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+PG86 cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05v cm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTo5LjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTpDb25zb2xhcztj b2xvcjpibGFjayI+SWYgeW91IGFyZSBub3QgbGlzdGVkIGFzIGFuIGF1dGhvciBvciBjb250cmli dXRvciwgdGhlbiBwbGVhc2UmbmJzcDs8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxk aXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjkuMHB0O2Zv bnQtZmFtaWx5OkNvbnNvbGFzO2NvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj5leHBsaWNpdGx5IHJlc3BvbmQgb25seSBp ZiB5b3UgYXJlIGF3YXJlIG9mIGFueSBJUFIgdGhhdCBoYXMgbm90IHlldCZuYnNwOzxvOnA+PC9v OnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFu IHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6OS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6Q29uc29sYXM7Y29sb3I6YmxhY2si PmJlZW4gZGlzY2xvc2VkIGluIGNvbmZvcm1hbmNlIHdpdGggSUVURiBydWxlcy48bzpwPjwvbzpw Pjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBz dHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjkuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OkNvbnNvbGFzO2NvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj48 bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNv Tm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjkuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OkNvbnNvbGFz O2NvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj5UaGFuayB5b3UsPG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8 ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTo5LjBwdDtm b250LWZhbWlseTpDb25zb2xhcztjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3NwYW4+ PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZv bnQtc2l6ZTo5LjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTpDb25zb2xhcztjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+TWFydGluICZh bXA7IFRob21hczxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNz PSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6OS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6Q29u c29sYXM7Y29sb3I6YmxhY2siPmJlc3MgY2hhaXJzPG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9k aXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTo5 LjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTpDb25zb2xhcztjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48 L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5 bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTo5LjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTpDb25zb2xhcztjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+WzFd Jm5ic3A7PGEgaHJlZj0iaHR0cHM6Ly9kYXRhdHJhY2tlci5pZXRmLm9yZy9kb2MvZHJhZnQtbW9o YW50eS1iZXNzLWV2cG4tZGYtZWxlY3Rpb24vIj5odHRwczovL2RhdGF0cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3Jn L2RvYy9kcmFmdC1tb2hhbnR5LWJlc3MtZXZwbi1kZi1lbGVjdGlvbi88L2E+PG86cD48L286cD48 L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5 bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTo5LjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTpDb25zb2xhcztjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+PG86 cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05v cm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTo5LjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTpDb25zb2xhcztj b2xvcjpibGFjayI+X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X188bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9y bWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjkuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OkNvbnNvbGFzO2Nv bG9yOmJsYWNrIj5CRVNTIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdDxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2 Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6OS4w cHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6Q29uc29sYXM7Y29sb3I6YmxhY2siPjxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpCRVNT QGlldGYub3JnIj5CRVNTQGlldGYub3JnPC9hPjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2 Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6OS4w cHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6Q29uc29sYXM7Y29sb3I6YmxhY2siPjxhIGhyZWY9Imh0dHBzOi8vd3d3 LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vYmVzcyI+aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFp bG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9iZXNzPC9hPjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRp dj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTAuNXB0O2Zv bnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xv cjpibGFjayI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Jsb2NrcXVv dGU+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImJvcmRlcjpub25lO2JvcmRlci10b3A6c29saWQgI0I1 QzRERiAxLjBwdDtwYWRkaW5nOjMuMHB0IDBpbiAwaW4gMGluIj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3Jt YWwiPjxiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0Nh bGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+RnJvbToNCjwv c3Bhbj48L2I+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7 Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7O2NvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj4mcXVvdDtI ZW5kZXJpY2t4LCBXaW0gKFdpbSkmcXVvdDsgJmx0OzxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzp3aW0uaGVuZGVy aWNreEBhbGNhdGVsLWx1Y2VudC5jb20iPndpbS5oZW5kZXJpY2t4QGFsY2F0ZWwtbHVjZW50LmNv bTwvYT4mZ3Q7PGJyPg0KPGI+RGF0ZTogPC9iPlNhdHVyZGF5LCBKdWx5IDI1LCAyMDE1IGF0IDEw OjI4IFBNPGJyPg0KPGI+VG86IDwvYj5zbW9oYW50eSBtb2hhbnR5ICZsdDs8YSBocmVmPSJtYWls dG86c2F0eWFtb2hAY2lzY28uY29tIj5zYXR5YW1vaEBjaXNjby5jb208L2E+Jmd0Ozxicj4NCjxi PlN1YmplY3Q6IDwvYj5SZTogUmVnZC4gREYgRWxlY3Rpb24gTm90ZXM8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bh bj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0i Zm9udC1zaXplOjEwLjVwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtDYWxpYnJpJnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3Nh bnMtc2VyaWYmcXVvdDs7Y29sb3I6YmxhY2siPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4N CjwvZGl2Pg0KPGJsb2NrcXVvdGUgc3R5bGU9ImJvcmRlcjpub25lO2JvcmRlci1sZWZ0OnNvbGlk ICNCNUM0REYgNC41cHQ7cGFkZGluZzowaW4gMGluIDBpbiA0LjBwdDttYXJnaW4tbGVmdDozLjc1 cHQ7bWFyZ2luLXJpZ2h0OjBpbiIgaWQ9Ik1BQ19PVVRMT09LX0FUVFJJQlVUSU9OX0JMT0NLUVVP VEUiPg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxz cGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTAuNXB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVv dDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+SGVyZSB5b3UgZ288bzpwPjwv bzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3Jt YWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTAuNXB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGli cmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8 L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJib3JkZXI6bm9uZTtib3JkZXIt dG9wOnNvbGlkICNCNUM0REYgMS4wcHQ7cGFkZGluZzozLjBwdCAwaW4gMGluIDBpbiI+DQo8cCBj bGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48Yj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJy aSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7O2NvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj5Gcm9tOg0KPC9zcGFu PjwvYj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtz YW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7O2NvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj4mcXVvdDtTYXR5YSBNb2hhbnR5IChzYXR5YW1v aCkmcXVvdDs8YnI+DQo8Yj5EYXRlOiA8L2I+U3VuZGF5IDI2IEp1bHkgMjAxNSAwODowNzxicj4N CjxiPlRvOiA8L2I+V2ltIEhlbmRlcmlja3g8YnI+DQo8Yj5TdWJqZWN0OiA8L2I+UmVnZC4gREYg RWxlY3Rpb24gTm90ZXM8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBj bGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjEwLjVwdDtmb250LWZhbWls eTomcXVvdDtDYWxpYnJpJnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYmcXVvdDs7Y29sb3I6YmxhY2si PjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8ZGl2 Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMC41cHQ7Zm9u dC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7O2NvbG9y OmJsYWNrIj5IaSBXaW0sPG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAg Y2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMC41cHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1p bHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7O2NvbG9yOmJsYWNr Ij48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0i TXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjEwLjVwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVv dDtDYWxpYnJpJnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYmcXVvdDs7Y29sb3I6YmxhY2siPkdvb2Qg dG8gdGFsayB0byB5b3UgYXQgdGhlIGFpcnBvcnQuPG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9k aXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTox MC41cHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1 b3Q7O2NvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj5JIGFtIGZvbGxvd2luZyB1cCBvbiB0aGUgcmVxdWVzdCB0byBwbGVh c2Ugc2VuZCBtZSB0aGUgd3JpdGV1cCByZWdhcmRpbmcgdGhlIHZhcmlvdXMgc2VydmljZSBtb2Rl bHMgc2VjIDYuMSDigJMgNi4zLjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4N CjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTAuNXB0O2ZvbnQt ZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjpi bGFjayI+QWJvdXQgMi0zIHllYXJzIGJhY2sgeW91IGhhZCBjaXJjdWxhdGVkIHN1Y2ggYSBkaWMu PG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1h bCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMC41cHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJy aSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7O2NvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj5CZXN0IHdvdWxkIGJl IGlmIHlvdeKAmXZlIGV4YW1wbGVzLjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRp dj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTAuNXB0O2Zv bnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xv cjpibGFjayI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAg Y2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMC41cHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1p bHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7O2NvbG9yOmJsYWNr Ij5UaGFua3MsPG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9 Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMC41cHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1 b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7O2NvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj4tLVNh dHlhPG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+ DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvYmxvY2txdW90ZT4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0K PC9ib2R5Pg0KPC9odG1sPg0K --_000_2E4BB27CAB87BF43B4207C0E55860F180EB70AB8eusaamb103erics_-- From nobody Mon Jan 25 10:38:35 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D95A51B38C6 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 10:38:34 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.502 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.502 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, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 4VmQAu2c9Aau for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 10:38:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from alln-iport-7.cisco.com (alln-iport-7.cisco.com [173.37.142.94]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47FDF1B38C5 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 10:38:33 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1422; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1453747113; x=1454956713; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:content-id: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=u0xixtomnrAWNISvpB1h8+ZkYF+kgRTd0ZLqwX6Iaq8=; b=leVHKpmpTs2adn7BkMdC8yqeG4pddzpaJLa6CeF7YPYcAj04oOHwdlrI PZSWi2gupxAHCXegowVca8qSInTmM2hWHQUicsGWbjvYvfr1vOcQipeRJ V9b5fbTywLv1qkEYWbeLl2jbFP3hG0x5hvUINnKsbsoFExOMM5+zpgOhk E=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0ADAgDVaqZW/4ENJK1egzpSbQaIUbIRA?= =?us-ascii?q?Q2BYxgKhW0CgUI4FAEBAQEBAQGBCoRCAQEEAQEBGh00HQEIGB43CyUCBAESiBs?= =?us-ascii?q?OvlIBAQEBAQEBAQIBAQEBAQEBARQEhjKEbYQbEQGEWQWWdgGFRYgQgV6ERIMnh?= =?us-ascii?q?TCKbINSAR4BAUKDaWqGDDR8AQEB?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,345,1449532800"; d="scan'208";a="231234559" Received: from alln-core-9.cisco.com ([173.36.13.129]) by alln-iport-7.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 25 Jan 2016 18:38:32 +0000 Received: from XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com (xch-aln-003.cisco.com [173.36.7.13]) by alln-core-9.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u0PIcWJE005885 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 25 Jan 2016 18:38:32 GMT Received: from xch-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.102.13) by XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com (173.36.7.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:38:31 -0600 Received: from xch-rcd-003.cisco.com ([173.37.102.13]) by XCH-RCD-003.cisco.com ([173.37.102.13]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:38:31 -0600 From: "Samer Salam (ssalam)" To: "thomas.morin@orange.com" , BESS , "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree@tools.ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree Thread-Index: AQHRUpaOE/U9KT8MU0ut9l7k3idEc58LjlAAgADqJoA= Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 18:38:31 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.2.130206 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.132.12.126] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <3EE3255DE779594BA857E8F68FC9460D@emea.cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 18:38:35 -0000 Support as co-author. I'm not aware of any IPR beyond what has already been disclosed. Thanks, Samer > >On 1/19/16, 12:51 AM, "BESS on behalf of thomas.morin@orange.com" > wrote: > >>Hello Working Group, >> >>This email starts a Working Group Last Call on >>draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree [1] which is considered mature and ready for >>a final working group review. >> >>Please read the document if you haven't read the most recent version yet >>(-03), and send your comments to the list, no later than *February the >>2nd* (2016-02-02). >> >>This is not only a call for comments on the document, but also a call of >>support for its publication. >> >>*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that >>applies to draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree, to ensure that IPR has been >>disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 >>and 5378 for more details). >> >>*If* you are listed as a document author or contributor of >>draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree please respond to this email and indicate >>whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. >> >>Thank you, >> >>Thomas/Martin >> >>[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree >> >>_______________________________________________ >>BESS mailing list >>BESS@ietf.org >>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess > From nobody Mon Jan 25 13:42:05 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C59D1A1A00; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 13:42:03 -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 N0GPGkUQ21AZ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 13:42:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1on0769.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::769]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9FCD11A03D5; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 13:42:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from BLUPR0501MB1715.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.163.120.18) by BLUPR0501MB1713.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.163.120.16) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.390.13; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 21:41:43 +0000 Received: from BLUPR0501MB1715.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.163.120.18]) by BLUPR0501MB1715.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.163.120.18]) with mapi id 15.01.0390.013; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 21:41:42 +0000 From: "Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang" To: Mach Chen , "draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-mib@tools.ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Shepherd review on draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-mib-01 Thread-Index: AdE8kUjGiBPQPDa8Qqa42K0qHj3d2wbJXJdw Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 21:41:42 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=zzhang@juniper.net; x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.13] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BLUPR0501MB1713; 5:SNqE31214h7dkOWGe8iKzTQhqGfnf2joMg2xyYa0xhCrC1JHebPAEa6wwsu0emtnaT9Fg7x8GweCnBycvc4n4LrhdZT81ujwxZpTJAH8dG7N3pFv5INLQ4ShJ1cJX1GyouwrYaDrzhUkVZxNvE2Nqg==; 24:VO7uwDnkolttJMinbbrPWtz/wA1GZCZLaJXUFCsEDodNJ75q3rLvPM1ZF8GY2H8SlhnvpiAOP2G4fll/dgC/Ka/RJJ16eMzEvXyd4SfQiSo= x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BLUPR0501MB1713; x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 308e132d-5391-4974-743a-08d325d050e2 x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(123027)(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(520078)(8121501046)(10201501046)(3002001); SRVR:BLUPR0501MB1713; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BLUPR0501MB1713; x-forefront-prvs: 083289FD26 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(377454003)(189002)(45984002)(13464003)(199003)(4326007)(10400500002)(87936001)(122556002)(19580405001)(2906002)(3280700002)(92566002)(40100003)(86362001)(2501003)(5004730100002)(230783001)(102836003)(1220700001)(77096005)(76576001)(1096002)(2900100001)(74316001)(15975445007)(54356999)(5001960100002)(2950100001)(3846002)(6116002)(81156007)(97736004)(66066001)(33656002)(5001770100001)(189998001)(19580395003)(99286002)(50986999)(105586002)(106356001)(586003)(5003600100002)(76176999)(5008740100001)(5002640100001)(101416001)(19627235001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BLUPR0501MB1713; H:BLUPR0501MB1715.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 25 Jan 2016 21:41:42.8252 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BLUPR0501MB1713 Archived-At: Cc: "bess-chairs@ietf.org" , "bess@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [bess] Shepherd review on draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-mib-01 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 21:42:03 -0000 Mach, Thank you very much for the review. Please see zzh> below. > -----Original Message----- > From: BESS [mailto:bess-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Mach Chen > Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2015 3:18 AM > To: draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-mib@tools.ietf.org > Cc: bess-chairs@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org > Subject: [bess] Shepherd review on draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-mib-01 >=20 > Hi Authors, >=20 > I am requested (by the WG chairs) to shepherd this draft, here are my > shepherd review comments on this document. >=20 >=20 > 1. To make the document more readable, expect for the well-known > abbreviations, there are a lot of abbreviations (e.g., MVRF, I-/S-PMSI, > etc.) that should be expanded when first use. Zzh> Will do. >=20 > 2. Abstract and introduction section >=20 > s/ multicast in MPLS/BGP-based Layer-3 VPN (MVPN)/ Multicast in BGP/MPLS > in IP VPN (MVPN), to align with the definition in RFC6513 Zzh> will do. >=20 > 3. > Section 2.1 >=20 > - mvpnIpmsiTable/Entry >=20 > This table contains all advertised or received intra-as I-PMSIs. > With PIM-MVPN, it is applicable only when BGP-Based Autodiscovery > of MVPN Membership is used. >=20 > - mvpnInterAsIpmsiTable/Entry >=20 > This table contains all advertised or received inter-as I-PMSIs. > With PIM-MVPN, it is applicable only when BGP-Based Autodiscovery > of MVPN Membership is used. > 1) For each table, why is there a "/Entry" followed? To avoid confusion, > I'd suggest to remove them if there is no special intention or meaning. Zzh> It is meant to say that xxxEntry are xxxTable are associated and their= usage is explained in the paragraphs. I will remove the "/Entry" >=20 > 2 )In addition, from the above text, I have the feeling that a > mvpnIpmsiTable or mvpnInterAsIpmsiTable can only contain advertised or > received I-PMSIs, but cannot contain both. Is this the intention? Zzh> Both. I'll change "or" to "and". >=20 >=20 > 4. Section 2.2, the LAST-UPDATED, ORGANIZATION, CONTACT-INFO and the > Revision history should be updated to reflect the latest status. Zzh> I had expected this to be updated at the last moment (e.g. at publicat= ion), but I am not sure. Will do whatever is the right procedure. >=20 > 5. mvpnMvrfNumber OBJECT-TYPE > SYNTAX Unsigned32 > MAX-ACCESS read-only > STATUS current > DESCRIPTION > "The total number of MVRFs for IPv4 or IPv6 or mLDP > C-Multicast that are present in this device." >=20 > Should the "or" be changed to "and"? Zzh> It's for any of those types. Someone said we should use "or". I am ope= n to suggestions. >=20 > 6. > There are several places in draft say the following or similar: > "An entry in this table is created for every MVRF in the device." > I'd suggest to replace the "every" as "each". Zzh> Will do. >=20 > 7. > Page 10: > mvpnGenCmcastRouteProtocol OBJECT-TYPE > SYNTAX INTEGER { pim (1), > bgp (2) > } > MAX-ACCESS read-write > STATUS current > DESCRIPTION > "Protocol used to signal C-multicast states across the > provider core. >=20 > s/ Protocol /The protocol is Zzh> Will do. >=20 > 8. > Page 13: > mvpnBgpGenVrfRtImport OBJECT-TYPE > SYNTAX MplsL3VpnRouteDistinguisher > MAX-ACCESS read-write > STATUS current > DESCRIPTION > "The VRF Route Import Extended Community that this device > adds to unicast vpn routes that it advertises for this mvpn." > ::=3D { mvpnBgpGeneralEntry 2} >=20 > mvpnBgpGenSrcAs OBJECT-TYPE > SYNTAX Unsigned32 > MAX-ACCESS read-only > STATUS current > DESCRIPTION > "The Source AS number in Source AS Extended Community that this > device adds to the unicast vpn routes that it advertises for > this mvpn." >=20 > Why should the "Source", "Extended", and "Community" be upper case? If > there is no special intention, suggest to change to lower case. You may > need to look through the whole document to do a text clean up. Zzh> That's per RFC 6513. >=20 > 9. > Section 3, Security consideration. >=20 > Given that the document introduces some read-write objects, I don't think > that the current statement of "This document does not introduce new > security risks." will pass the IESG review. I'd suggest the authors to > enhance the security consideration section. For the mib security > consideration, you may refer to some existing mid documents (e.g, > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-id-mib-11) that have > already passed the IESG review. Also, you may refer to some history > discussions on a mib security consideration (e.g., > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-trill-oam-mib/history/ ). Zzh> This seems to be no different from CLI configuration/monitoring? But I= will study those past discussions. >=20 > 10.Please make sure that the MIB Modules are compiled cleanly. Zzh> I did use http://www.simpleweb.org/ietf/mibs/validate/. Did you notice= any problem? >=20 > 11. BTW, I saw the WG chairs had issued the IPR poll, and only Jeffery > replied, to progress this draft, the authors and contributors have to > respond to the IPR poll. Zzh> Working on that. >=20 >=20 > Happy Holidays! Zzh> Thanks! Part of the reason for this late response :-) Jeffrey >=20 > Best regards, > Mach >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > BESS mailing list > BESS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess From nobody Mon Jan 25 17:20:49 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E77171ACCF6; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 17:20:47 -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 0zxXemeMzZg0; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 17:20:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1on0718.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::718]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 102B51ACCF4; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 17:20:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from BLUPR0501MB1715.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.163.120.18) by BLUPR0501MB1714.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.163.120.17) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.390.13; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 01:20:24 +0000 Received: from BLUPR0501MB1715.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.163.120.18]) by BLUPR0501MB1715.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.163.120.18]) with mapi id 15.01.0390.013; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 01:20:25 +0000 From: "Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang" To: Mach Chen , "draft-ietf-bess-l2l3-vpn-mcast-mib@tools.ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Shepherd review on draft-ietf-bess-l2l3-vpn-mcast-mib-01 Thread-Index: AdE8l6g2f4Ni5AFqQjuOGGjy0vqRCwbIZunw Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 01:20:24 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=zzhang@juniper.net; x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.14] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BLUPR0501MB1714; 5:M2zTt/2g4/+8Ed9nO+6JLxTzFGlXF3CRBhEDww42MqBYfsChFGJLTOGWcgtp5mGyonp1ok2lyxtR9Yy8mqApxUsPnhbcawZR7irL7melyWgZfWNKUzEfigb0oFq2QpGqnFRVSy9i6SNtMuyVWT8nFg==; 24:VC570Bnvg3t8ft9EYWocSHOwYh0uTENAYQEC3a22AjN+dgeH1p5w6eAnP2HD+hPvuxTD6IO4b9qfB8X0WM9dhK0xdNP2f+pE1ZDCEIh+6V4= x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BLUPR0501MB1714; x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 5bf13a9a-6bd1-40e8-194e-08d325eede42 x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(123027)(601004)(2401047)(520078)(5005006)(8121501046)(3002001)(10201501046); SRVR:BLUPR0501MB1714; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BLUPR0501MB1714; x-forefront-prvs: 08331F819E x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(45984002)(377454003)(189002)(199003)(13464003)(5001960100002)(74316001)(54356999)(2950100001)(3846002)(76576001)(77096005)(1096002)(102836003)(1220700001)(2900100001)(50986999)(105586002)(106356001)(76176999)(5003600100002)(101416001)(586003)(5008740100001)(66066001)(5002640100001)(6116002)(5001770100001)(81156007)(97736004)(99286002)(19580395003)(189998001)(33656002)(2906002)(19580405001)(87936001)(122556002)(10400500002)(4326007)(3280700002)(5004730100002)(230783001)(40100003)(86362001)(92566002)(2501003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BLUPR0501MB1714; H:BLUPR0501MB1715.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 26 Jan 2016 01:20:24.9283 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BLUPR0501MB1714 Archived-At: Cc: "bess-chairs@ietf.org" , "bess@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [bess] Shepherd review on draft-ietf-bess-l2l3-vpn-mcast-mib-01 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 01:20:48 -0000 Mach, Thank you very much for the review. Please see zzh> below. > -----Original Message----- > From: Mach Chen [mailto:mach.chen@huawei.com] > Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2015 4:04 AM > To: draft-ietf-bess-l2l3-vpn-mcast-mib@tools.ietf.org > Cc: bess@ietf.org; bess-chairs@ietf.org > Subject: Shepherd review on draft-ietf-bess-l2l3-vpn-mcast-mib-01 >=20 > Hi Authors, >=20 > I am requested (by the WG chairs) to shepherd this draft, here are my > shepherd review comments on this document. >=20 >=20 > 1. Idnits tool shows: > ** There are 4 instances of too long lines in the document, the longest > one > being 3 characters in excess of 72. Zzh> will try to address that. I intended to cut & paste text from some exi= sting RFCs. >=20 > 2. Expand the unwell-known abbreviations when first use. Zzh> Will do. >=20 > 2. Abstract says: > "This memo defines an experimental portion of the Management > Information Base for use with network management protocols in the > Internet community." >=20 > But the intended status of this document is "Standards Track", what's the > real intention? Zzh> Will change to "standard". >=20 > 3. From the title, the document is to define mibs for L2 and L3 Multicast > VPNs, it's better to define and scope what are L2 multicast VPN and L3 > multicast VPN. > And the draft uses "Multicast in VPN" to identify MVPN, it > seems not accurate. It's better to use the consistent definition and > description for MVPN through the whole document IMHO. Zzh> The Introduction section makes it clear that the scope is for VPLS and= (IP) VPN Multicast. As I just alluded to in the previous sentence, I'll us= e "IP VPN" for L3 case. Is that ok? >=20 > 4. Section 4, > The LAST-UPDATED, ORGANIZATION, CONTACT-INFO and the Revision history > should be updated to reflect the latest status. Zzh> I had expected to update this at the final step of publication. Will f= ollow appropriate advice. >=20 > 5. Page 5, >=20 > This document defines the following flags: >=20 > + Leaf Information Required (L)" >=20 > s/+ Leaf Information Required (L)"/ Leaf Information Required (L)" Zzh> The text is quoting RFC 6514, " 5. PMSI Tunnel Attribute". Having sai= d that, I'll just remove the quote and simply say it's the flag field in th= e PMSI Tunnel Attribute, because other flags could be defined in other spec= ifications. >=20 > 6. > Section 5. Security Considerations > "N/A" >=20 > The same issue as the MVPN mib, please enhance it. Zzh> Will research. >=20 > 7. Please make sure that the MIB Modules are compiled cleanly. Zzh> Please let me know if you've noticed any issue. Thanks! Jeffrey >=20 > Best regards, > Mach From nobody Mon Jan 25 22:40:26 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64DD91B2FA2; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 22:40:25 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.202 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-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 iCy5TuKb6pFi; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 22:40:23 -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 7D0701B2F9A; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 22:40:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml401-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id CDL49694; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 06:40:19 +0000 (GMT) Received: from SZXEMA412-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.72.71) by lhreml401-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.240) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 06:40:15 +0000 Received: from SZXEMA510-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.3.177]) by SZXEMA412-HUB.china.huawei.com ([10.82.72.71]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 14:40:08 +0800 From: Mach Chen To: "Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang" , "draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-mib@tools.ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Shepherd review on draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-mib-01 Thread-Index: AdE8kUjGiBPQPDa8Qqa42K0qHj3d2wbJXJdwABL2WzA= Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 06:40:08 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.111.102.135] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A0B0205.56A714D4.0029, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=169.254.3.177, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32 X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 2989401749aa35e98563f9cb18c3f19e Archived-At: Cc: "bess-chairs@ietf.org" , "bess@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [bess] Shepherd review on draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-mib-01 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 06:40:25 -0000 Hi Jeffery, Some responses inline... Snipped. > > > > 5. mvpnMvrfNumber OBJECT-TYPE > > SYNTAX Unsigned32 > > MAX-ACCESS read-only > > STATUS current > > DESCRIPTION > > "The total number of MVRFs for IPv4 or IPv6 or mLDP > > C-Multicast that are present in this device." > > > > Should the "or" be changed to "and"? >=20 > Zzh> It's for any of those types. Someone said we should use "or". I am o= pen to > suggestions. If the mvpnMvrfNumber is designed to be the number of each type of the VRFs= , then "or" should be used and it's better to add some clarification text h= ere. Otherwise, "and" should be used. When I read the mib, it gives my feel= ing that mvpnMvrfNumber is the number of all MVRFs.=20 > > 8. > > Page 13: > > mvpnBgpGenVrfRtImport OBJECT-TYPE > > SYNTAX MplsL3VpnRouteDistinguisher > > MAX-ACCESS read-write > > STATUS current > > DESCRIPTION > > "The VRF Route Import Extended Community that this device > > adds to unicast vpn routes that it advertises for this mvpn." > > ::=3D { mvpnBgpGeneralEntry 2} > > > > mvpnBgpGenSrcAs OBJECT-TYPE > > SYNTAX Unsigned32 > > MAX-ACCESS read-only > > STATUS current > > DESCRIPTION > > "The Source AS number in Source AS Extended Community that > this > > device adds to the unicast vpn routes that it advertises for > > this mvpn." > > > > Why should the "Source", "Extended", and "Community" be upper case? If > > there is no special intention, suggest to change to lower case. You > > may need to look through the whole document to do a text clean up. >=20 > Zzh> That's per RFC 6513. If that's the case, I'm fine with it. >=20 > > > > 9. > > Section 3, Security consideration. > > > > Given that the document introduces some read-write objects, I don't > > think that the current statement of "This document does not introduce > > new security risks." will pass the IESG review. I'd suggest the > > authors to enhance the security consideration section. For the mib > > security consideration, you may refer to some existing mid documents > > (e.g, > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-id-mib-11) that > > have already passed the IESG review. Also, you may refer to some > > history discussions on a mib security consideration (e.g., > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-trill-oam-mib/history/ ). >=20 > Zzh> This seems to be no different from CLI configuration/monitoring? But= I will > study those past discussions. Please do so and update the security consideration section. >=20 > > > > 10.Please make sure that the MIB Modules are compiled cleanly. >=20 > Zzh> I did use http://www.simpleweb.org/ietf/mibs/validate/. Did you noti= ce > any problem? I did not run any validation, if you did, that's great. Once you update the document, we can start the MIB doctor review.=20 Best regards, Mach From nobody Mon Jan 25 22:54:53 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 132F91B2FB4; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 22:54:52 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.202 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-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 QPIG3TzneDG8; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 22:54:50 -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 F34201B2FB2; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 22:54:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml402-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id CHL07778; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 06:54:46 +0000 (GMT) Received: from lhreml704-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.130) by lhreml402-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.241) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 06:54:45 +0000 Received: from SZXEMA412-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.72.71) by lhreml704-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.130) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 06:54:45 +0000 Received: from SZXEMA510-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.3.177]) by SZXEMA412-HUB.china.huawei.com ([10.82.72.71]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 14:54:40 +0800 From: Mach Chen To: "Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang" , "draft-ietf-bess-l2l3-vpn-mcast-mib@tools.ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Shepherd review on draft-ietf-bess-l2l3-vpn-mcast-mib-01 Thread-Index: AdE8l6g2f4Ni5AFqQjuOGGjy0vqRCwbIZunwABLRaoA= Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 06:54:38 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.111.102.135] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A020205.56A71837.005E, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=169.254.3.177, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32 X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: e3259ccff9668e75d148fbe9eb661365 Archived-At: Cc: "bess-chairs@ietf.org" , "bess@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [bess] Shepherd review on draft-ietf-bess-l2l3-vpn-mcast-mib-01 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 06:54:52 -0000 Hi Jeffery, Some responses inline... >=20 > > > > 3. From the title, the document is to define mibs for L2 and L3 > > Multicast VPNs, it's better to define and scope what are L2 multicast > > VPN and L3 multicast VPN. > > And the draft uses "Multicast in VPN" to identify MVPN, it seems not > > accurate. It's better to use the consistent definition and description > > for MVPN through the whole document IMHO. >=20 > Zzh> The Introduction section makes it clear that the scope is for VPLS a= nd (IP) > VPN Multicast. As I just alluded to in the previous sentence, I'll use "I= P VPN" for > L3 case. Is that ok? According to RFC6513, Multicast in BGP/MPLS in IP VPN is called MVPN, you m= ay take a look at RFC6513 and try to align the terms with it. >=20 > > > > 4. Section 4, > > The LAST-UPDATED, ORGANIZATION, CONTACT-INFO and the Revision history > > should be updated to reflect the latest status. >=20 > Zzh> I had expected to update this at the final step of publication. Will= follow > appropriate advice. >=20 > > > > 5. Page 5, > > > > This document defines the following flags: > > > > + Leaf Information Required (L)" > > > > s/+ Leaf Information Required (L)"/ Leaf Information Required (L)" >=20 > Zzh> The text is quoting RFC 6514, " 5. PMSI Tunnel Attribute". Having s= aid > that, I'll just remove the quote and simply say it's the flag field in th= e PMSI > Tunnel Attribute, because other flags could be defined in other specifica= tions. OK. > > > > 6. > > Section 5. Security Considerations > > "N/A" > > > > The same issue as the MVPN mib, please enhance it. >=20 > Zzh> Will research. Sure, please. >=20 > > > > 7. Please make sure that the MIB Modules are compiled cleanly. >=20 > Zzh> Please let me know if you've noticed any issue. No. Once the document updated, we can start the MIB doctor review. Best regards, Mach >=20 > Thanks! > Jeffrey >=20 > > > > Best regards, > > Mach From nobody Mon Jan 25 23:47:27 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E084E1A6F9A; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 23:47:23 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.202 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-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 wP7B1S0su4NI; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 23:47:21 -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 79EA61A6F98; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 23:47:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml405-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id CDL56945; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 07:47:17 +0000 (GMT) Received: from NKGEML404-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.35) by lhreml405-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.242) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 07:47:15 +0000 Received: from NKGEML515-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.5.62]) by nkgeml404-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.35]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 15:47:12 +0800 From: "Dongjie (Jimmy)" To: Eric C Rosen , "idr@ietf.org" , BESS , "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [bess] draft-rosen-idr-rfc3107bis-00 Thread-Index: AQHRTi3nNGAWkbeTK0mnYPsI1D9BXJ8NbouA Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 07:47:11 +0000 Message-ID: <76CD132C3ADEF848BD84D028D243C92774E1CA15@NKGEML515-MBS.china.huawei.com> References: <5696933E.1080802@juniper.net> In-Reply-To: <5696933E.1080802@juniper.net> Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.130.151.75] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A020205.56A72486.0032, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=169.254.5.62, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32 X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 48b7346b462526dc7cd533c204f3535e Archived-At: Subject: Re: [bess] draft-rosen-idr-rfc3107bis-00 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 07:47:24 -0000 Hi Eric,=20 Thanks for writing this draft, it provides useful clarifications and update= s for RFC 3107.=20 After reading the draft, I have some comments: 1. For NLRI encoding with single label, this draft says that "the S bit MUS= T be set to one on transmission". IMO RFC 3107 does not mandate this, and a= s you said some existing implementations may not set the S bit. To ensure b= ackward compatibility, maybe the requirement on setting the S bit can be re= laxed. 2. For NLRI encoding with multiple labels, I guess the beginning of the pre= fix field is identified based on the S bit of the last label. If a malforme= d NLRI is received, in which the S bit of the last label is not set, then t= he prefix cannot be recognized, and the treat-as-withdraw error handling is= not applicable. This may be worth mentioned in the draft.=20 3. Section 2.5 describes implicit withdrawn and load balancing in detail. O= ne possible issue here is it seems that the same next hop is required for t= he routes in Update U1 and U2. While section 9 of RFC 4271 specifies: "...if the NLRI of the new route is identical to the one the route curre= ntly has stored in the Adj-RIB-In, then the new route SHALL replace the old= er route in the Adj-RIB-In, thus implicitly withdrawing the older route fro= m service." Thus same next hop is not required for implicit withdrawn. This also applie= s to the load balancing case with Add_Path, in which the 2 paths used for l= oad balancing may have different next hops. Best regards, Jie > -----Original Message----- > From: BESS [mailto:bess-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Eric C Rosen > Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2016 2:11 AM > To: idr@ietf.org; BESS ; mpls@ietf.org > Subject: [bess] draft-rosen-idr-rfc3107bis-00 >=20 > Folks, >=20 > Pardon the cross-post, but I think this may be of interest to all three o= f > the IDR, MPLS, and BESS WGs. >=20 > I've posted draft-rosen-idr-rfc3107bis-00 ("Using BGP to Bind MPLS Labels > to Address Prefixes"), which is intended of course to obsolete RFC 3107 > ("Carrying Label Information in BGP"). (While I put "idr" in the name of > the draft, it's not completely obvious which WG should own this draft > (assuming it progresses)). >=20 > The purpose of this draft is the following: >=20 > - It fixes a number of errors in RFC3107. It attempts to do so in a way > that is compatible with existing implementations. >=20 > - It removes the material about "Advertising Multiple Routes to a > Destination". This is a feature that was never implemented as specified, > and the text about it just causes confusion. The functionality that this > feature was intended to provide can now be better provided by using > add-paths; this is discussed in the draft. >=20 > - It is explicit about its applicability to SAFI 128 as well as to SAFI 4= . >=20 > - It clarifies the procedures for withdrawing and replacing label binding= s. >=20 > - It discusses the relationship between SAFI-1 routes and SAFI-4 routes, > which is very unclear in RFC3107. Different implementations have > treated the SAFI-1/SAFI-4 interactions differently, and the draft discuss= es > these differences. However, as the draft is not intended to favor any on= e > implementation over another, it can't do much more than point out some > of the differences among implementations. >=20 > - RFC 3107 provides an encoding that allows BGP to assign multiple labels > (i.e., a label stack) to a given prefix. However, it provides no semanti= cs > for this, and this feature has been only rarely implemented. > In fact, it is believed that some implementations will not parse the > Updates correctly if they encode multiple labels in the NLRI. Therefore > the draft only allows a label stack to be assigned to a given prefix if a= new > Capability has been exchanged. It also discusses the semantics of > assigning a label stack, and gives some examples of how this might be > used. >=20 > I hope that those of you who are interested in this topic will provide yo= ur > comments. I've tried to make the draft compatible with existing > implementations and deployments, so if anyone sees anything that > negatively impacts an existing implementation, please comment on that. >=20 > I also removed most of the text that explains why it is a good idea to us= e > BGP to distribute label bindings. That text was important in the '90s, b= ut > now seems rather out of date. However, I would welcome comments on > whether an updated "motivation/positioning" section should be added. >=20 > Thanks, >=20 > Eric >=20 > _______________________________________________ > BESS mailing list > BESS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess From nobody Tue Jan 26 00:12:54 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8EC31A7026 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 00:12:53 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.55 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.55 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] 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 aDD8lKN8I_eR for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 00:12:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from p-mail1.rd.orange.com (p-mail1.rd.orange.com [161.106.1.2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B01F1A701D for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 00:12:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from p-mail1.rd.orange.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id A13BD7CC002; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 09:12:51 +0100 (CET) Received: from FTRDCH01.rd.francetelecom.fr (unknown [10.194.32.11]) by p-mail1.rd.orange.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94C367CC001; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 09:12:51 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.193.71.12] (10.193.71.12) by FTRDCH01.rd.francetelecom.fr (10.194.32.11) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.266.1; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 09:12:51 +0100 From: Thomas Morin To: Organization: Orange Message-ID: <56A72A83.10906@orange.com> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 09:12:51 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Cc: draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir@tools.ietf.org Subject: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-02 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 08:12:53 -0000 Hello working group, This email starts a two-week poll on adopting draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-02 [1] as a working group item. Please send comments to the list and state if you support adoption or not (in the later case, please also state the reasons). This poll runs until **February 9th**. *Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). ==> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from each author and contributor. If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. Thank you, Martin & Thomas bess chairs [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-02 From nobody Tue Jan 26 00:14:51 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietf.org Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11C391A00C6; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 00:14:49 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: IETF Secretariat To: , , X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.13.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20160126081449.15370.37927.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 00:14:49 -0800 Archived-At: Subject: [bess] The BESS WG has placed draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued" X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 08:14:49 -0000 The BESS WG has placed draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir in state Call For Adoption By WG Issued (entered by Thomas Morin) The document is available at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir/ From nobody Tue Jan 26 00:33:30 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22CE21A033B for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 00:33:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 LKlsn64Nu3Ri for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 00:33:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp-fr.alcatel-lucent.com (fr-hpida-esg-02.alcatel-lucent.com [135.245.210.21]) (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 7E3FE1A1BA4 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 00:33:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from fr712umx4.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (unknown [135.245.210.45]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id E78A5D9FF0461; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 08:33:13 +0000 (GMT) Received: from fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.42]) by fr712umx4.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO-o) with ESMTP id u0Q8XES4012047 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 26 Jan 2016 08:33:15 GMT Received: from FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr711wxchhub01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.111]) by fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id u0Q8XEI0019208 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 26 Jan 2016 09:33:14 +0100 Received: from FR711WXCHMBA07.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([169.254.3.98]) by FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.239.2.111]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 09:33:14 +0100 From: "Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE)" To: Thomas Morin , "bess@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-02 Thread-Index: AQHRWBFfvTghLpWB/kW9FPrvTvuY0Z8NeEGA Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 08:33:13 +0000 Message-ID: References: <56A72A83.10906@orange.com> In-Reply-To: <56A72A83.10906@orange.com> Accept-Language: nl-BE, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/0.0.0.151008 x-originating-ip: [135.239.27.40] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-02 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 08:33:29 -0000 U3VwcG9ydCBmb3IgV0cgYWRvcHRpb24gYW5kIGEgY3JpdGljYWwgY29tcG9uZW50IHRvIG9wdGlt aXNlIG11bHRpY2FzdCBkaXN0cmlidXRpb24gdy9vIHJlcXVpcmluZyB1bmRlcmxheSBtdWx0aWNh c3QuDQpOb3QgYXdhcmUgaWYgSVBSIHJlbGF0ZWQgdG8gdGhpcyBkcmFmdC4NCg0KDQoNCg0KT24g MjYvMDEvMTYgMDk6MTIsICJCRVNTIG9uIGJlaGFsZiBvZiBUaG9tYXMgTW9yaW4iIDxiZXNzLWJv dW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmcgb24gYmVoYWxmIG9mIHRob21hcy5tb3JpbkBvcmFuZ2UuY29tPiB3cm90 ZToNCg0KPkhlbGxvIHdvcmtpbmcgZ3JvdXAsDQo+DQo+VGhpcyBlbWFpbCBzdGFydHMgYSB0d28t d2VlayBwb2xsIG9uIGFkb3B0aW5nDQo+ZHJhZnQtcmFiYWRhbi1iZXNzLWV2cG4tb3B0aW1pemVk LWlyLTAyIFsxXSBhcyBhIHdvcmtpbmcgZ3JvdXAgaXRlbS4NCj4NCj5QbGVhc2Ugc2VuZCBjb21t ZW50cyB0byB0aGUgbGlzdCBhbmQgc3RhdGUgaWYgeW91IHN1cHBvcnQgYWRvcHRpb24gb3INCj5u b3QgKGluIHRoZSBsYXRlciBjYXNlLCBwbGVhc2UgYWxzbyBzdGF0ZSB0aGUgcmVhc29ucykuDQo+ DQo+VGhpcyBwb2xsIHJ1bnMgdW50aWwgKipGZWJydWFyeSA5dGgqKi4NCj4NCj4NCj4qQ29pbmNp ZGVudGFsbHkqLCB3ZSBhcmUgYWxzbyBwb2xsaW5nIGZvciBrbm93bGVkZ2Ugb2YgYW55IElQUiB0 aGF0DQo+YXBwbGllcyB0byB0aGlzIGRyYWZ0LCB0byBlbnN1cmUgdGhhdCBJUFIgaGFzIGJlZW4g ZGlzY2xvc2VkIGluDQo+Y29tcGxpYW5jZSB3aXRoIElFVEYgSVBSIHJ1bGVzIChzZWUgUkZDcyAz OTc5LCA0ODc5LCAzNjY5DQo+YW5kIDUzNzggZm9yIG1vcmUgZGV0YWlscykuDQo+DQo+PT0+ICpJ ZiogeW91IGFyZSBsaXN0ZWQgYXMgYSBkb2N1bWVudCBhdXRob3Igb3IgY29udHJpYnV0b3IgcGxl YXNlDQo+cmVzcG9uZCB0byB0aGlzIGVtYWlsIGFuZCBpbmRpY2F0ZSB3aGV0aGVyIG9yIG5vdCB5 b3UgYXJlIGF3YXJlIG9mIGFueSANCj5yZWxldmFudCBJUFIuDQo+DQo+VGhlIGRyYWZ0IHdpbGwg bm90IGJlIGFkb3B0ZWQgdW50aWwgYSByZXNwb25zZSBoYXMgYmVlbiByZWNlaXZlZCBmcm9tDQo+ ZWFjaCBhdXRob3IgYW5kIGNvbnRyaWJ1dG9yLg0KPg0KPklmIHlvdSBhcmUgbm90IGxpc3RlZCBh cyBhbiBhdXRob3Igb3IgY29udHJpYnV0b3IsIHRoZW4gcGxlYXNlIA0KPmV4cGxpY2l0bHkgcmVz cG9uZCBvbmx5IGlmIHlvdSBhcmUgYXdhcmUgb2YgYW55IElQUiB0aGF0IGhhcyBub3QgeWV0IA0K PmJlZW4gZGlzY2xvc2VkIGluIGNvbmZvcm1hbmNlIHdpdGggSUVURiBydWxlcy4NCj4NCj5UaGFu ayB5b3UsDQo+DQo+TWFydGluICYgVGhvbWFzDQo+YmVzcyBjaGFpcnMNCj4NCj5bMV0gaHR0cHM6 Ly90b29scy5pZXRmLm9yZy9odG1sL2RyYWZ0LXJhYmFkYW4tYmVzcy1ldnBuLW9wdGltaXplZC1p ci0wMg0KPg0KPg0KPg0KPg0KPg0KPg0KPg0KPg0KPg0KPg0KPg0KPg0KPg0KPl9fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQo+QkVTUyBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QN Cj5CRVNTQGlldGYub3JnDQo+aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9i ZXNzDQo= From nobody Tue Jan 26 01:05:40 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A16781A8781 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 01:05:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 4mgnHa7xK3X0 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 01:05:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp-fr.alcatel-lucent.com (fr-hpida-esg-02.alcatel-lucent.com [135.245.210.21]) (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 2DEBF1A877A for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 01:05:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from fr712umx4.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (unknown [135.245.210.45]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id 85ECAF2606E2C for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 09:05:34 +0000 (GMT) Received: from fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.42]) by fr712umx4.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO-o) with ESMTP id u0Q95Z33005802 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 09:05:36 GMT Received: from FR712WXCHHUB03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr712wxchhub03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.74]) by fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id u0Q95NFU000345 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 10:05:35 +0100 Received: from [135.224.195.224] (135.239.27.40) by FR712WXCHHUB03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (135.239.2.74) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 10:05:23 +0100 Message-ID: <56A736D2.80409@alcatel-lucent.com> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 10:05:22 +0100 From: Martin Vigoureux User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: References: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: <569370E8.7070000@alcatel-lucent.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [135.239.27.40] Archived-At: Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 09:05:39 -0000 WG, there is good support for the document and all authors have declared that they are not aware of any IPR that relates to this draft. So we have a new WG document Authors please resubmit as draft-ietf-bess-evpn-df-election-00 thank you -m Le 11/01/2016 10:07, Martin Vigoureux a écrit : > Hello working group, > > This email starts a two-week poll on adopting > draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election-02 [1] as a working group item. > > Please state on the list if you support adoption or not (in the both > cases, please also state the reasons). > > This poll runs until *the 25th of January*. > > Currently no IPR has been disclosed against this document. > > *Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that > applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in > compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 > and 5378 for more details). > > ==> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please > respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any > relevant IPR. > > The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from > each author and contributor. > > If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please > explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet > been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. > > Thank you, > > Martin & Thomas > bess chairs > > [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-df-election/ > > _______________________________________________ > BESS mailing list > BESS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess > > From nobody Tue Jan 26 01:32:31 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietf.org Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC2F91A886E for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 01:32:29 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.13.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20160126093229.19752.74092.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 01:32:29 -0800 From: IETF Secretariat Archived-At: Subject: [bess] Milestones changed for bess WG X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 09:32:30 -0000 Changed milestone "Submit specification for extranet support in multicast VPNs to IESG as PS", resolved as "Done", added draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-extranet to milestone, removed draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-extranet from milestone. Changed milestone "Submit specifications for SPB-M/E-VPN interoperability to IESG as PS", resolved as "Done", added draft-ietf-bess-spbm-evpn to milestone, removed draft-ietf-l2vpn-spbm-evpn from milestone. URL: https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/bess/charter/ From nobody Tue Jan 26 01:34:28 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietf.org Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E5DF1A8877 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 01:34:28 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.13.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20160126093428.19918.19921.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 01:34:28 -0800 From: IETF Secretariat Archived-At: Subject: [bess] Milestones changed for bess WG X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 09:34:28 -0000 Changed milestone "Submit specifications for PBB/E-VPN interoperability to IESG as PS", resolved as "Done". URL: https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/bess/charter/ From nobody Tue Jan 26 06:56:39 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3FF71B2A8D for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 06:56:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 I8o1mWjTDPdB for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 06:56:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp-fr.alcatel-lucent.com (fr-hpida-esg-02.alcatel-lucent.com [135.245.210.21]) (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 4CDFF1B2A8C for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 06:56:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from fr712umx4.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (unknown [135.245.210.45]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id 8BA9F240EF03B; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 14:56:29 +0000 (GMT) Received: from fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.42]) by fr712umx4.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO-o) with ESMTP id u0QEuVaM028720 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 26 Jan 2016 14:56:32 GMT Received: from FR712WXCHHUB03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr712wxchhub03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.74]) by fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id u0QEuSD5004338 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 26 Jan 2016 15:56:31 +0100 Received: from FR711WXCHMBA01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([169.254.1.228]) by FR712WXCHHUB03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.239.2.74]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 15:56:30 +0100 From: "Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US)" To: EXT Thomas Morin , "bess@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Poll for adoption: draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-02 Thread-Index: AQHRWBFjVU/wjLnr50GJtDY/0nnhsJ8NTHSA Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 14:56:30 +0000 Message-ID: <1EDE6935-1ED9-401B-B707-218898D6AE8F@alcatel-lucent.com> References: <56A72A83.10906@orange.com> In-Reply-To: <56A72A83.10906@orange.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/0.0.0.160109 x-originating-ip: [135.239.27.39] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-02 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 14:56:36 -0000 U3VwcG9ydCBhcyBhIGNvLWF1dGhvci4NClRoZSBkcmFmdCBoYXMgYmVlbiBhcm91bmQgZm9yIDEu NSB5ZWFycyBhbmQgZGlzY3Vzc2VkIGF0IGxlbmd0aC4gSXQgcHJvdmlkZXMgYSBrZXkgc29sdXRp b24gdG8gb3B0aW1pemUgaW5ncmVzcyByZXBsaWNhdGlvbiBpbiBvdmVybGF5IElQIG5ldHdvcmtz IHRoYXQgZG9u4oCZdCBzdXBwb3J0IFBJTS4NCk5vdCBhd2FyZSBvZiBhbnkgSVBSLg0KDQpUaGFu ayB5b3UuDQpKb3JnZQ0KDQoNCg0KDQpPbiAxLzI2LzE2LCAxMjoxMiBBTSwgIkVYVCBUaG9tYXMg TW9yaW4iIDx0aG9tYXMubW9yaW5Ab3JhbmdlLmNvbT4gd3JvdGU6DQoNCj5IZWxsbyB3b3JraW5n IGdyb3VwLA0KPg0KPlRoaXMgZW1haWwgc3RhcnRzIGEgdHdvLXdlZWsgcG9sbCBvbiBhZG9wdGlu Zw0KPmRyYWZ0LXJhYmFkYW4tYmVzcy1ldnBuLW9wdGltaXplZC1pci0wMiBbMV0gYXMgYSB3b3Jr aW5nIGdyb3VwIGl0ZW0uDQo+DQo+UGxlYXNlIHNlbmQgY29tbWVudHMgdG8gdGhlIGxpc3QgYW5k IHN0YXRlIGlmIHlvdSBzdXBwb3J0IGFkb3B0aW9uIG9yDQo+bm90IChpbiB0aGUgbGF0ZXIgY2Fz ZSwgcGxlYXNlIGFsc28gc3RhdGUgdGhlIHJlYXNvbnMpLg0KPg0KPlRoaXMgcG9sbCBydW5zIHVu dGlsICoqRmVicnVhcnkgOXRoKiouDQo+DQo+DQo+KkNvaW5jaWRlbnRhbGx5Kiwgd2UgYXJlIGFs c28gcG9sbGluZyBmb3Iga25vd2xlZGdlIG9mIGFueSBJUFIgdGhhdA0KPmFwcGxpZXMgdG8gdGhp cyBkcmFmdCwgdG8gZW5zdXJlIHRoYXQgSVBSIGhhcyBiZWVuIGRpc2Nsb3NlZCBpbg0KPmNvbXBs aWFuY2Ugd2l0aCBJRVRGIElQUiBydWxlcyAoc2VlIFJGQ3MgMzk3OSwgNDg3OSwgMzY2OQ0KPmFu ZCA1Mzc4IGZvciBtb3JlIGRldGFpbHMpLg0KPg0KPj09PiAqSWYqIHlvdSBhcmUgbGlzdGVkIGFz IGEgZG9jdW1lbnQgYXV0aG9yIG9yIGNvbnRyaWJ1dG9yIHBsZWFzZQ0KPnJlc3BvbmQgdG8gdGhp cyBlbWFpbCBhbmQgaW5kaWNhdGUgd2hldGhlciBvciBub3QgeW91IGFyZSBhd2FyZSBvZiBhbnkg DQo+cmVsZXZhbnQgSVBSLg0KPg0KPlRoZSBkcmFmdCB3aWxsIG5vdCBiZSBhZG9wdGVkIHVudGls IGEgcmVzcG9uc2UgaGFzIGJlZW4gcmVjZWl2ZWQgZnJvbQ0KPmVhY2ggYXV0aG9yIGFuZCBjb250 cmlidXRvci4NCj4NCj5JZiB5b3UgYXJlIG5vdCBsaXN0ZWQgYXMgYW4gYXV0aG9yIG9yIGNvbnRy aWJ1dG9yLCB0aGVuIHBsZWFzZSANCj5leHBsaWNpdGx5IHJlc3BvbmQgb25seSBpZiB5b3UgYXJl IGF3YXJlIG9mIGFueSBJUFIgdGhhdCBoYXMgbm90IHlldCANCj5iZWVuIGRpc2Nsb3NlZCBpbiBj b25mb3JtYW5jZSB3aXRoIElFVEYgcnVsZXMuDQo+DQo+VGhhbmsgeW91LA0KPg0KPk1hcnRpbiAm IFRob21hcw0KPmJlc3MgY2hhaXJzDQo+DQo+WzFdIGh0dHBzOi8vdG9vbHMuaWV0Zi5vcmcvaHRt bC9kcmFmdC1yYWJhZGFuLWJlc3MtZXZwbi1vcHRpbWl6ZWQtaXItMDINCj4NCj4NCj4NCj4NCj4N Cj4NCj4NCj4NCj4NCj4NCj4NCj4NCj4NCg== From nobody Tue Jan 26 07:02:32 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFC381B2AAF for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 07:02:30 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 yoLt-39qyYyI for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 07:02:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp-us.alcatel-lucent.com (us-hpswa-esg-01.alcatel-lucent.com [135.245.18.29]) (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 747461B2AAE for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 07:02:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from us70uumx3.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (unknown [135.245.18.15]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id 43626E0DA0F89; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 15:02:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from us70uusmtp3.zam.alcatel-lucent.com (us70uusmtp3.zam.alcatel-lucent.com [135.5.2.65]) by us70uumx3.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id u0QF2QNX020392 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 26 Jan 2016 15:02:27 GMT Received: from US70UWXCHHUB01.zam.alcatel-lucent.com (us70uwxchhub01.zam.alcatel-lucent.com [135.5.2.48]) by us70uusmtp3.zam.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id u0QF2QiR023223 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 26 Jan 2016 15:02:26 GMT Received: from US70UWXCHMBA03.zam.alcatel-lucent.com ([169.254.9.172]) by US70UWXCHHUB01.zam.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.5.2.48]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 10:02:26 -0500 From: "Dolganow, Andrew (Nokia - SG)" To: EXT Thomas Morin Thread-Topic: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-02 Thread-Index: AQHRWBFg9hnnGz/WvUerBuloHlEhjZ8N5P8K Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 15:02:25 +0000 Message-ID: <9E27056F-3D46-4C5C-91B5-5BAC7349E4B9@alcatel-lucent.com> References: <56A72A83.10906@orange.com> In-Reply-To: <56A72A83.10906@orange.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-CA X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir@tools.ietf.org" , "bess@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-02 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 15:02:31 -0000 Support Andrew Sent from my iPhone > On Jan 26, 2016, at 12:13 AM, EXT Thomas Morin = wrote: >=20 > Hello working group, >=20 > This email starts a two-week poll on adopting > draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-02 [1] as a working group item. >=20 > Please send comments to the list and state if you support adoption or > not (in the later case, please also state the reasons). >=20 > This poll runs until **February 9th**. >=20 >=20 > *Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that > applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in > compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 > and 5378 for more details). >=20 > =3D=3D> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please > respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any re= levant IPR. >=20 > The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from > each author and contributor. >=20 > If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please explicitly= respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet been disclosed i= n conformance with IETF rules. >=20 > Thank you, >=20 > Martin & Thomas > bess chairs >=20 > [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-02 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > BESS mailing list > BESS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess From nobody Tue Jan 26 10:05:14 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C811E1AC3E3 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 10:05:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 519U4FKiSyxO for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 10:05:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp-us.alcatel-lucent.com (us-hpatc-esg-02.alcatel-lucent.com [135.245.18.28]) (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 1FC741AC3D2 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 10:05:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from us70tumx2.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (unknown [135.245.18.14]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id 1F90371EB3ABA; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 18:05:07 +0000 (GMT) Received: from us70tusmtp2.zam.alcatel-lucent.com (us70tusmtp2.zam.alcatel-lucent.com [135.5.2.64]) by us70tumx2.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id u0QI58SB031098 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 26 Jan 2016 18:05:09 GMT Received: from US70UWXCHHUB01.zam.alcatel-lucent.com (us70uwxchhub01.zam.alcatel-lucent.com [135.5.2.48]) by us70tusmtp2.zam.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id u0QI57XW027344 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 26 Jan 2016 18:05:08 GMT Received: from US70TWXCHMBA10.zam.alcatel-lucent.com ([169.254.4.60]) by US70UWXCHHUB01.zam.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.5.2.48]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 13:05:08 -0500 From: "Sathappan, Senthil (Nokia - US)" To: Thomas Morin , "bess@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-02 Thread-Index: AQHRWBFhELp2+spmjU2WfC+sptxoRJ8OF7/Q Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 18:05:07 +0000 Message-ID: <67BB2DACD18480429D1A539B1086C7857395F124@US70TWXCHMBA10.zam.alcatel-lucent.com> References: <56A72A83.10906@orange.com> In-Reply-To: <56A72A83.10906@orange.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.5.27.17] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-02 X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 18:05:12 -0000 Support as co-author. Not aware of any IPR Thanks, Senthil. -----Original Message----- From: BESS [mailto:bess-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Morin Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 12:13 AM To: bess@ietf.org Cc: draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir@tools.ietf.org Subject: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-02 Hello working group, This email starts a two-week poll on adopting draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-02 [1] as a working group item. Please send comments to the list and state if you support adoption or not (= in the later case, please also state the reasons). This poll runs until **February 9th**. *Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that applies= to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in compliance with IE= TF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). =3D=3D> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please resp= ond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant= IPR. The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from each = author and contributor. If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please explicitly r= espond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet been disclosed in = conformance with IETF rules. Thank you, Martin & Thomas bess chairs [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-02 _______________________________________________ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess From nobody Tue Jan 26 11:05:05 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0DCA1B2BAA for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 11:05:02 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 fFOeToUHHL06 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 11:04:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bl2on0144.outbound.protection.outlook.com [65.55.169.144]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 015B71B2B8A for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 11:04:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from BY1PR0501MB1095.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.160.103.141) by BY1PR0501MB1095.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.160.103.141) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.365.19; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 19:04:55 +0000 Received: from BY1PR0501MB1095.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.160.103.141]) by BY1PR0501MB1095.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.160.103.141]) with mapi id 15.01.0365.024; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 19:04:55 +0000 From: Poorna Pushkala B To: Wen Lin , "EXT - thomas.morin@orange.com" , 'BESS' , "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree@tools.ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree Thread-Index: AQHRUpaMRIWl0q18J0WaTklZjsxfc58MIOcAgAA4RgCAAYa1AA== Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 19:04:55 +0000 Message-ID: <9D19FA16-D2F7-49F1-8E8A-C124DC0735F7@juniper.net> References: <569DF8F7.2000703@orange.com> <000301d15763$0b0c4f70$2124ee50$@com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/0.0.0.150911 authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=poorna@juniper.net; x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.10] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BY1PR0501MB1095; 5:Dsa0iZ9X7txH4wTYykp2Xeouym5xXg0bU/pk/Iaam1lcr/Fouf5mAdWuAQQ8uK0QizZIFidHxgfVrA5Xs8CeYCU1NxCoNFmIKx2WGHri2zBoLOGiDOjqhRYn7j24NEJOv1YK8/0l56WrMx02iNtSHQ==; 24:PiWLUHOl/VJNy0QovYAfLQ6moV5l7nBIJSq+Yl11EBw56xElEe8jhPwnwxagREsucHuMzD2UxCX+5UUMNwSoVZ46KD5w4VgxQHgy5zFEKao= x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BY1PR0501MB1095; x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 4c75bd95-af85-4698-b243-08d326839413 x-ld-processed: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4,ExtAddr x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(138986009662008); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(3002001)(10201501046); SRVR:BY1PR0501MB1095; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BY1PR0501MB1095; x-forefront-prvs: 08331F819E x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(479174004)(24454002)(164054003)(377424004)(189002)(377454003)(199003)(13464003)(54356999)(5001960100002)(15975445007)(1220700001)(4001430100002)(3846002)(2950100001)(102836003)(1096002)(77096005)(107886002)(11100500001)(97736004)(2900100001)(36756003)(4001350100001)(1941001)(106356001)(50986999)(5008740100001)(106116001)(105586002)(101416001)(586003)(19580395003)(81156007)(76176999)(5001770100001)(6116002)(5002640100001)(99286002)(189998001)(82746002)(3280700002)(66066001)(87936001)(19580405001)(33656002)(83506001)(2906002)(10400500002)(4326007)(122556002)(5004730100002)(230783001)(83716003)(92566002)(40100003)(86362001)(2501003)(104396002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BY1PR0501MB1095; H:BY1PR0501MB1095.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 26 Jan 2016 19:04:55.1730 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY1PR0501MB1095 Archived-At: Cc: Poorna Pushkala B Subject: Re: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 19:05:03 -0000 SGkNCg0KSW4gc2VjdGlvbiA1LjEgb2YgdmVyc2lvbiAzIG9mIHRoZSBkcmFmdCwgdGhlIHN1YnR5 cGUgaXMgbWVudGlvbmVkIGFzIOKAnDB4MDXigJ0sIHdoZXJlYXMgdGhlIGZpZ3VyZSBiZWxvdyBz aG93cyBpdCBhcyDigJwweDA04oCdLg0KQ2FuIHRoZSBhdXRob3JzIGtpbmRseSBmaXggaXQ/IFRo YW5rcy4NCg0KUmVnYXJkcw0KUG9vcm5hDQoNCg0KNS4xIDxodHRwczovL3Rvb2xzLmlldGYub3Jn L2h0bWwvZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1iZXNzLWV2cG4tZXRyZWUtMDMjc2VjdGlvbi01LjE+IEUtVFJFRSBF eHRlbmRlZCBDb21tdW5pdHkNCg0KICAgVGhpcyBFeHRlbmRlZCBDb21tdW5pdHkgaXMgYSBuZXcg dHJhbnNpdGl2ZSBFeHRlbmRlZCBDb21tdW5pdHkgaGF2aW5nDQogICBhIFR5cGUgZmllbGQgdmFs dWUgb2YgMHgwNiAoRVZQTikgYW5kIHRoZSBTdWItVHlwZSAweDA1LiANCg0KDQogICAgICAgIDAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgMSAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAyICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg IDMNCiAgICAgICAgMCAxIDIgMyA0IDUgNiA3IDggOSAwIDEgMiAzIDQgNSA2IDcgOCA5IDAgMSAy IDMgNCA1IDYgNyA4IDkgMCAxDQogICAgICAgKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSst Ky0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSsNCiAgICAgICB8IFR5cGU9MHgwNiAg ICAgfCBTdWItVHlwZT0weDA0IHwgRmxhZ3MoMSBPY3RldCl8ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgfA0KICAg ICAgICstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0r LSstKy0rLSstKy0rDQogICAgICAgfCAgUmVzZXJ2ZWQ9MCAgIHwgICAgICAgICAgIExlYWYgTGFi ZWwgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIHwNCiAgICAgICArLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0r LSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKw0KDQoNCg0KDQoN Ck9uIDEvMjUvMTYsIDk6NDYgQU0sICJXZW4gTGluIiA8d2xpbkBqdW5pcGVyLm5ldD4gd3JvdGU6 DQoNCj5GdWxseSBzdXBwb3J0IGFzIGEgY28tYXV0aG9yLiBJIGFtIG5vdCBhd2FyZSBvZiBhbnkg dW4tZGlzY2xvc2VkIElQUi4NCj4NCj5UaGFua3MsDQo+V2VuDQo+DQo+Pg0KPj4tLS0tLU9yaWdp bmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0tLQ0KPj5Gcm9tOiBCRVNTIFttYWlsdG86YmVzcy1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYu b3JnXSBPbiBCZWhhbGYgT2YgVGhvbWFzIE1vcmluDQo+PlNlbnQ6IFR1ZXNkYXksIEphbnVhcnkg MTksIDIwMTYgMjo1MSBBTQ0KPj5UbzogQkVTUzsgZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1iZXNzLWV2cG4tZXRyZWVA dG9vbHMuaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4+U3ViamVjdDogW2Jlc3NdIFdHIExhc3QgQ2FsbCBvbiBkcmFmdC1p ZXRmLWJlc3MtZXZwbi1ldHJlZQ0KPj4NCj4+SGVsbG8gV29ya2luZyBHcm91cCwNCj4+DQo+PlRo aXMgZW1haWwgc3RhcnRzIGEgV29ya2luZyBHcm91cCBMYXN0IENhbGwgb24gZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1i ZXNzLWV2cG4tZXRyZWUNCj4+WzFdIHdoaWNoIGlzIGNvbnNpZGVyZWQgbWF0dXJlIGFuZCByZWFk eSBmb3IgYSBmaW5hbCB3b3JraW5nIGdyb3VwIHJldmlldy4NCj4+DQo+PlBsZWFzZSByZWFkIHRo ZSBkb2N1bWVudCBpZiB5b3UgaGF2ZW4ndCByZWFkIHRoZSBtb3N0IHJlY2VudCB2ZXJzaW9uIHll dA0KPj4oLTAzKSwgYW5kIHNlbmQgeW91ciBjb21tZW50cyB0byB0aGUgbGlzdCwgbm8gbGF0ZXIg dGhhbiAqRmVicnVhcnkgdGhlDQo+PjJuZCogKDIwMTYtMDItMDIpLg0KPj4NCj4+VGhpcyBpcyBu b3Qgb25seSBhIGNhbGwgZm9yIGNvbW1lbnRzIG9uIHRoZSBkb2N1bWVudCwgYnV0IGFsc28gYSBj YWxsIG9mDQo+PnN1cHBvcnQgZm9yIGl0cyBwdWJsaWNhdGlvbi4NCj4+DQo+PipDb2luY2lkZW50 YWxseSosIHdlIGFyZSBhbHNvIHBvbGxpbmcgZm9yIGtub3dsZWRnZSBvZiBhbnkgSVBSIHRoYXQN Cj4+YXBwbGllcw0KPj50byBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLWJlc3MtZXZwbi1ldHJlZSwgdG8gZW5zdXJlIHRo YXQgSVBSIGhhcyBiZWVuIGRpc2Nsb3NlZCBpbg0KPj5jb21wbGlhbmNlIHdpdGggSUVURiBJUFIg cnVsZXMgKHNlZSBSRkNzIDM5NzksIDQ4NzksIDM2NjkgYW5kIDUzNzggZm9yDQo+Pm1vcmUNCj4+ ZGV0YWlscykuDQo+Pg0KPj4qSWYqIHlvdSBhcmUgbGlzdGVkIGFzIGEgZG9jdW1lbnQgYXV0aG9y IG9yIGNvbnRyaWJ1dG9yIG9mDQo+PmRyYWZ0LWlldGYtYmVzcy1ldnBuLWV0cmVlIHBsZWFzZSBy ZXNwb25kIHRvIHRoaXMgZW1haWwgYW5kIGluZGljYXRlDQo+PndoZXRoZXINCj4+b3Igbm90IHlv dSBhcmUgYXdhcmUgb2YgYW55IHJlbGV2YW50IElQUi4NCj4+DQo+PlRoYW5rIHlvdSwNCj4+DQo+ PlRob21hcy9NYXJ0aW4NCj4+DQo+PlsxXSBodHRwczovL2RhdGF0cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3JnL2Rv Yy9kcmFmdC1pZXRmLWJlc3MtZXZwbi1ldHJlZQ0KPj4NCj4+X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCj4+QkVTUyBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QNCj4+QkVTU0Bp ZXRmLm9yZw0KPj5odHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL2Jlc3MNCj4+ DQo+Pl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQo+PkJF U1MgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQo+PkJFU1NAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4+aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcv bWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9iZXNzDQo+DQo+X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCj5CRVNTIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KPkJFU1NAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj5o dHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL2Jlc3MNCg== From nobody Wed Jan 27 01:38:01 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDD601B37A1; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 01:37:57 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.501 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.501 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 aT63fXuql4Zt; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 01:37:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from aer-iport-4.cisco.com (aer-iport-4.cisco.com [173.38.203.54]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 987561B379D; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 01:37:48 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=21674; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1453887469; x=1455097069; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=3NFbQFy29CWnD143yVjlzF+hSjQly9QrXpqNEDpFG6Y=; b=PJpWT8SPse8v5n//5ucWZdIN8djHbTahMfUI4YbFHrAPN9EHH+AqFn24 FoG2tzxFq8sT/P7jRYFP2VoMrE72aTNFn5c5OR9cAnzbE2ULIqOgJTIjb NFWDA86KXjTiTTirm89MC3BO9QBWEgbxKtpXtL+SGv30jnRiEPXdrlIhs Q=; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,354,1449532800"; d="scan'208,217";a="624827069" Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-1.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 27 Jan 2016 09:37:46 +0000 Received: from [10.60.67.86] (ams-bclaise-8915.cisco.com [10.60.67.86]) by aer-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u0R9bjGd032059; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 09:37:46 GMT To: Eric C Rosen , Susan Hares , "'The IESG'" References: <20151217133049.1038.44405.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <56741869.5020505@juniper.net> <00af01d139c6$898fb720$9caf2560$@ndzh.com> <567859EC.6030103@juniper.net> <006101d13ce1$725cd650$571682f0$@ndzh.com> <56799F9F.4010907@juniper.net> <000d01d13d94$80868a10$81939e30$@ndzh.com> <56966A3D.4000708@juniper.net> From: Benoit Claise Message-ID: <56A88FE9.7000505@cisco.com> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 10:37:45 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <56966A3D.4000708@juniper.net> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------010105000807060203090603" Archived-At: Cc: draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-extranet@ietf.org, aretana@cisco.com, "'John G. Scudder'" , bess-chairs@ietf.org, martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com, bess@ietf.org Subject: Re: [bess] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-extranet-04: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 09:37:58 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------010105000807060203090603 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Thank you Sue for your review and your follow-up, and even proposing some new text. Much appreciated. Authors, this is an example of a very dense document. I understand that the MPLS VPN + BGP + Multicast can get complex, but it's difficult to extract the deployment considerations out of these 60 pages. There are some operational paragraph from time to time. I agree with Sue when she mentions: "The whole draft is a set of rules for handling policy, BGP A-D routes, tunnel set-up, and PIM Join/leaves in the case of an intra net. Unless these rules are followed exactly, traffic may flow into a VPN it is not suppose to." This document doesn't give an operator “so-what†for deployment in 60 pages. You know, a few summary paragraphs that indicates where this specification is useful and where it is not for operators, and the potential fragility of the solution (which could be in a new operational consideration section or in the security considerations. I don't think I've seen text around coordination to set up filter, for example. Sue has been trying to be helpful and even proposed some text: Whenever a VPN is provisioned, there is a risk that provisioning errors will result in an unintended cross-connection of VPNs, which would create a security problem for the customers. Extranet can be particularly tricky, as it intentionally cross-connects VPNs, but in a manner that is intended to be strictly limited by policy. If one is connecting two VPNs that have overlapping address spaces, one has to be sure that the inter-VPN traffic isn't to/from the part of the address space that is in the overlap. The draft discusses a lot of the corner cases, and a lot of the scenarios in which things can go wrong. Regards, Benoit > On to version -06 ... > > On 12/23/2015 10:13 AM, Susan Hares wrote: >> >> Sections which must be added to clear my concerns >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> *4.4.1 Extranet Source Extended Community * >> >> To facilitate this, we define a new Transitive Opaque Extended >> Community, the "Extranet Source" Extended Community. >> >> The value field of this extended community is all zeros. >> >> *Restrictions: *This value field MUST be set to zero upon >> origination, MUST be ignored upon reception and MUST be passed >> unchanged by intermediate routers. >> >> *Additional Restrictions: *A Route Reflector MUST NOT add/remove the >> Extranet Source Extended Community from the VPN-IP routes reflected >> by the Route Reflector, including the case where VPN-IP routes >> received via IBGP are reflected to EBGP peers (inter-AS option (c), >> see [RFC6513] Section 10). >> > > The draft has the following text in section 4.4.1 ("The Extranet > Source Extended Community"): > > "The value field of the Extended Community MUST be set to zero. " > > "A PE router that interprets this Extended Community MUST ignore the > contents of the value field." > > and the following text in section 4.4.2 ("Distribution of Extranet > Source Extended Community"): > > "A Route Reflector MUST NOT add or remove the Extranet Source > Extended Community from the VPN-IP routes reflected by the Route > Reflector, including the case where VPN-IP routes received via IBGP > are reflected to EBGP peers (inter-AS option (c), see [RFC6513] > Section 10). The value of the Extended Community MUST NOT be changed > by the route reflector." > > "When re-advertising VPN-IP routes, ASBRs MUST NOT add/remove the > Extranet Source Extended Community from these routes. This includes > inter-AS options (b) and (c) (see [RFC6513] Section 10). The value of > the Extended Community MUST NOT be changed by the ASBRs." > > It seems to me that this contains the information you have requested. > It may not be in the format you prefer, but I think it goes beyond the > scope of an ops-dir review (or an IESG Discuss) to demand format changes. >> >> *4.4.2 Extranet Separation Extended community * >> >> ** >> >> We define a new Transitive Opaque Extended Community, the "Extranet >> Separation" Extended Community. This Extended Community is used >> only when extranet separation is being used. >> >> *Restrictions:* Its value field MUST be set to zero upon >> origination, MUST be ignored upon reception, and MUST be >> >> passed unchanged by intermediate routers. >> >> * Restrictions on Adding/deleting this community:* ?? (Eric – >> please add something here). >> > The draft now contains the following text in section 4.5 ("The > Extranet Separation Extended Community"): > > "We define a new Transitive Opaque Extended Community, the "Extranet > Separation" Extended Community (see [RFC4360], [RFC7153], and Section > 9 of this document). This Extended Community is used only when > extranet separation is being used. Its value field MUST be set to zero > upon origination, MUST be ignored upon reception, and MUST be passed > unchanged by intermediate routers. A Route Reflector MUST NOT add or > remove the Extranet Separation Extended Community from the routes it > reflects, including the case where routes received via IBGP are > reflected to EBGP peers (inter-AS option (c), see [RFC6513] Section 10)." > > It seems to me that this contains the information you have requested. > >> *Comments that could be put in a Security section: * >> >> ** >> >> Whenever a VPN is provisioned, there is a risk that provisioning >> errors will result in an unintended cross-connection of VPNs, which >> would create a security problem for the customers. Extranet can be >> particularly tricky, as it intentionally cross-connects VPNs, but in >> a manner that is intended to be strictly limited by policy. >> > The Security Considerations section already contains the following text: > > "As is the case with any application of technology based upon > [RFC4364], misconfiguration of the RTs may result in VPN security > violations (i.e., may result in a packet being delivered to a VPN > where, according to policy, it is not supposed to go)." > > I don't think the above requested text really adds anything, it's just > saying the same thing over again. >> >> If one is connecting two VPNs that have overlapping address spaces, >> one has to be sure that the inter-VPN traffic isn't to/from the part >> of the address space that is in the overlap. The draft discusses a >> lot of the corner cases, and a lot of the scenarios in which things >> can go wrong. >> > The difficulty of dealing with overlapping address spaces when > connecting two VPNs is already discussed extensively throughout the > document. I don't see that the requested paragraph adds anything of > substance. > --------------010105000807060203090603 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Thank you Sue for your review and your follow-up, and even proposing some new text. Much appreciated.

Authors, this is an example of a very dense document. I understand that the MPLS VPN + BGP + Multicast can get complex, but it's difficult to extract the deployment considerations out of these 60 pages.
There are some operational paragraph from time to time. 

      I agree with Sue when she mentions: "The whole draft is a set of
      rules for handling policy, BGP A-D routes, tunnel set-up, and PIM
      Join/leaves in the case of an intra net.  Unless these rules are
      followed exactly, traffic may flow into a VPN it is not suppose
      to."

      This document doesn't give an operator “so-what†for deployment in
      60 pages. You know, a few summary paragraphs that indicates where
      this specification is useful and where it is not for operators,
      and the potential fragility of the solution (which could be in a
      new operational consideration section or in the security
      considerations. I don't think I've seen text around coordination
      to set up filter, for example.

      

      Sue has been trying to be helpful and even proposed some text:

      
Whenever a VPN is provisioned, there is a risk that
        provisioning errors will result in an unintended
        cross-connection of VPNs, which would create a security problem
        for the customers.  Extranet can be particularly tricky, as it
        intentionally cross-connects VPNs, but in a manner that is
        intended to be strictly limited by policy.  If one is connecting
        two VPNs that have overlapping address spaces, one has to be
        sure that the inter-VPN traffic isn't to/from the part of the
        address space that is in the overlap.  The draft discusses a lot
        of the corner cases, and a lot of the scenarios in which things
        can go wrong.  

      

      

      Regards, Benoit

    

      
      On to version -06 ...

      

      On 12/23/2015 10:13 AM, Susan Hares wrote:

      

        
        
        

          
Sections
              which must be added to clear my concerns 

          
----------------------------------------------------------------

          
 

          
4.4.1 Extranet Source Extended
              Community 

          
 

          
   To facilitate this, we define a new
            Transitive Opaque Extended  Community, the "Extranet Source"
            Extended Community. 

          
   The value field of this extended
            community is all zeros.    

          
 

          
Restrictions:

            This value field MUST be set  to zero upon origination,
             MUST be ignored upon reception and MUST  be passed
            unchanged by intermediate routers.  

          
 

          
 Additional

              Restrictions:  A Route Reflector MUST NOT add/remove
            the Extranet Source Extended  Community from the VPN-IP
            routes reflected by  the Route Reflector,  including the
            case where VPN-IP routes received via IBGP are reflected to
            EBGP peers (inter-AS option (c), see [RFC6513]   Section
            10).

        

      

      

      The draft has the following text in section 4.4.1 ("The Extranet
      Source Extended Community"):

      

         "The value field of the Extended Community MUST be set to
        zero. "

      

        "A PE router that interprets this Extended
        Community MUST ignore the contents of the value field."

      

      and the following text in section 4.4.2 ("Distribution of Extranet
      Source Extended Community"):

      

         "A Route Reflector MUST NOT add or remove the Extranet
        Source Extended Community from the VPN-IP routes reflected by
        the Route Reflector, including the case where VPN-IP routes
        received via IBGP are reflected to EBGP peers (inter-AS option
        (c), see [RFC6513] Section 10).  The value of the Extended
        Community MUST NOT be changed by the route reflector."

      

         "When re-advertising VPN-IP routes, ASBRs MUST NOT
        add/remove the Extranet Source Extended Community from these
        routes.  This includes inter-AS options (b) and (c) (see
        [RFC6513] Section 10).  The value of the Extended Community MUST
        NOT be changed by the ASBRs."

      

      It seems to me that this contains the information you have
      requested.  It may not be in the format you prefer, but I think it
      goes beyond the scope of an ops-dir review (or an IESG Discuss) to
      demand format changes.

      

        

          

          
 

          
4.4.2 Extranet Separation Extended
              community 

          
 

          
We define a new Transitive Opaque
            Extended Community, the "Extranet  Separation" Extended
            Community.  This Extended Community is used only  when
            extranet separation is being used.  

          
 

          
   Restrictions:  Its value
            field MUST be set to zero upon origination, MUST be ignored
            upon reception, and MUST be

          
   passed unchanged by intermediate
            routers.

          
 

          
  Restrictions on Adding/deleting
              this community:  ??  (Eric – please add something
            here). 

        

      

      The draft now contains the following text in section 4.5 ("The
      Extranet Separation Extended Community"):

      

         "We define a new Transitive Opaque Extended Community, the
        "Extranet Separation" Extended Community (see [RFC4360],
        [RFC7153], and Section 9 of this document).  This Extended
        Community is used only when extranet separation is being used. 
        Its value field MUST be set to zero upon origination, MUST be
        ignored upon reception, and MUST be passed unchanged by
        intermediate routers.  A Route Reflector MUST NOT add or remove
        the Extranet Separation Extended Community from the routes it
        reflects, including the case where routes received via IBGP are
        reflected to EBGP peers (inter-AS option (c), see [RFC6513]
        Section 10)."

      

      It seems to me that this contains the information you have
      requested.

      

      

        

          

          
Comments that could be put in a
              Security section: 

          
 

          
Whenever a VPN is provisioned, there
            is a risk that provisioning errors will result in an
            unintended cross-connection of VPNs, which would create a
            security problem for the customers.  Extranet can be
            particularly tricky, as it intentionally cross-connects
            VPNs, but in a manner that is intended to be strictly
            limited by policy.

        

      

      The Security Considerations section already contains the following
      text:

      

       "As is the case with any application of technology based upon
        [RFC4364], misconfiguration of the RTs may result in VPN
        security violations (i.e., may result in a packet being
        delivered to a VPN where, according to policy, it is not
        supposed to go)." 

        

      I don't think the above requested text really adds anything,
      it's just saying the same thing over again.

      

        

          
 If one is connecting two VPNs that
            have overlapping address spaces, one has to be sure that the
            inter-VPN traffic isn't to/from the part of the address
            space that is in the overlap.  The draft discusses a lot of
            the corner cases, and a lot of the scenarios in which things
            can go wrong.  

          
 

        

      

      The difficulty of dealing with overlapping address spaces when
      connecting two VPNs is already discussed extensively throughout
      the document.  I don't see that the requested paragraph adds
      anything of substance.

      

    

    

  


--------------010105000807060203090603--


From nobody Wed Jan 27 10:35:40 2016
Return-Path: 
X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D554E1B2AE3; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 10:35:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 1RDuur-GgCuT; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 10:35:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2on0105.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.100.105]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE37D1B2AE4; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 10:35:34 -0800 (PST)
Authentication-Results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=erosen@juniper.net; 
Received: from [172.28.32.198] (66.129.241.10) by BY2PR0501MB2149.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.163.198.23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.390.13; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 18:35:31 +0000
To: Benoit Claise , Susan Hares , "'The IESG'" 
References: <20151217133049.1038.44405.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <56741869.5020505@juniper.net> <00af01d139c6$898fb720$9caf2560$@ndzh.com> <567859EC.6030103@juniper.net> <006101d13ce1$725cd650$571682f0$@ndzh.com> <56799F9F.4010907@juniper.net> <000d01d13d94$80868a10$81939e30$@ndzh.com> <56966A3D.4000708@juniper.net> <56A88FE9.7000505@cisco.com>
From: Eric C Rosen 
Message-ID: <56A90DEF.2000701@juniper.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 13:35:27 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <56A88FE9.7000505@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------060506040102020103020807"
X-Originating-IP: [66.129.241.10]
X-ClientProxiedBy: CY1PR16CA0003.namprd16.prod.outlook.com (25.162.134.141) To BY2PR0501MB2149.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (25.163.198.23)
X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; BY2PR0501MB2149; 2:ua9FXPmUYG4PKSH1pBp8Q5BxsWglfgXrlxnQ2P81NWMkv92XYd53qadLUZbsBJfv+/J0tWjtu0Kl6axEtjh/sJnpuTNTXqx5bZ5clLjbUus3EW4S+7O/DlJBsEyLZa/bB3Op6/eK+8V1df0EOpFi+Q==; 3:qCygc/zxyejmgEPcsg0cDOdl45WKW66EnHetZkrW4HhCIISPak9wZ19Q9rU7Qdm/r+r+Z0uy/g1XZ0VDHAriVpc8OUJKPb8WYR2UvlIzrS2rmyvPX/1F3L1q9VGxX7TJ; 25:s608ZeD1cKnzx8rMGxvMt/VBOmQklIPK468miXFas44Kn5EVm37paCTC+BpVBSc+rOBk11B+bOPvanXrjE8v8wGdWzVxMhtWlWjpyFUUo1e9mTc9zFihA2Nl6GTgBUKhQvU/E1W8iorNe2KjKqJ+ycEqANGzNmEvsOzicE7Bq+MFMf2G2+A/oeY33c9d6Gd2GKdlVMHAJ7+luoQ+Sm4ulyT+pkIYZiT/GzEseNkFn3wvCO+HNOChLOcsFtvxCQ05
X-Microsoft-Antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BY2PR0501MB2149;
X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: 63b00830-54a2-4a5f-33e2-08d32748a422
X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; BY2PR0501MB2149; 20: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; 4:DdUx/Me0oLMlqs0bW8C9B7S3Qu8SWGqm2iBzoO2jZbjC99hUDjN+6Y4CwFYk1feVISo7ox0m2hgDq7z1HLkIwV8xsYNcdXYx9P7Axr8C3YM/7TQjluJMGFTa+mDbbYEEdYCR0fSGzBz1wmi0kr+Avc9dW4s6BgUsvHH/Sfy/Rblw2WNZB7i8ZaarzsRDALuKwId2EyJ7u4YKJQucJbmN5dk7mEYfyfNlAIXb5cpHlfq4wiHeDWYoJkZuzHcArNg73hkg/XO24O9uimLotVvpUeL1RLQ7rquMniRNkjO+0E+ikw6n+GWethuK5+6qy8SIDgtTGLdbg8K25i2nCNb12+qG5oxRfWtER/E63yCdOOcY7DLDdzJuJo1JCwQfgb10VYQ/S/pWNp7tfRjelg1YdqW3fMUfJWnK3tTdzkFHI8c=
X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: 
X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-Test: UriScan:(95692535739014);
X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(3002001)(10201501046); SRVR:BY2PR0501MB2149; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BY2PR0501MB2149; 
X-Forefront-PRVS: 0834BAF534
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6049001)(6009001)(479174004)(24454002)(189002)(377454003)(199003)(87266999)(5001960100002)(54356999)(3846002)(84326002)(2950100001)(77096005)(5004730100002)(1096002)(5008740100001)(189998001)(81156007)(65956001)(50986999)(101416001)(586003)(76176999)(106356001)(65806001)(65816999)(105586002)(16236675004)(64126003)(6116002)(87976001)(19580395003)(33656002)(83506001)(42186005)(2906002)(97736004)(122386002)(80316001)(4326007)(19580405001)(512874002)(36756003)(230783001)(5001770100001)(92566002)(66066001)(59896002)(40100003)(86362001)(93886004)(4001350100001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BY2PR0501MB2149; H:[172.28.32.198]; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; 
Received-SPF: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts)
X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: =?utf-8?B?MTtCWTJQUjA1MDFNQjIxNDk7MjM6ZmdiZUFKQm9MVHp0aUFtTzU3cVM4NEti?= =?utf-8?B?YjRrb1N5NTV5ejh0amlIdkZRdGozMGJxdVNnVFY4djNTbDBEbHNzeXhBWjVx?= =?utf-8?B?L2owQmR1bXYrZ0FMOGxUTkRjeCtJMmFUUjZMK0dCa2FOWFRrWjFUZWxTQXJa?= =?utf-8?B?VCtubXpQRWxXd2FYanpzbXRCUzJaMVBpeWJkQ3pOT3k2TnZIRVkrVXREVjhh?= =?utf-8?B?VkphVk54TjZMYlJia0VvZGVNNmgraEdNSlhIOW9HSHh6NEJmTFVMR0VDZVhQ?= =?utf-8?B?OWlnUkwreEQ2aTRhR0NTZStTazkvaDBOd3UvN1B0bFRCRWovSGhUbFJuU2dH?= =?utf-8?B?K0h2SzZ0YVphMmRUYUFaQitFWk9KNEEvSlV1SXZNTzJCUHhSbEdiNysxN1Vj?= =?utf-8?B?dGw3aFVsb0o0UWZ6Zi9lY1EzQ0VwNGpnOElXU3p5eVhaQUNRQU1Ja0NDL2lY?= =?utf-8?B?ZXI0cXozV0MrR3Q0TXpNeVMvakxqSFpxc041TWZjYWFhWmsvcXBFeUNpeGZ0?= =?utf-8?B?RGVHYXhuSWpQcDhDVStqK1lNUUlFeU9jNXRIQW5wZmh1VzliS1krcG1XZlZa?= =?utf-8?B?bHEzUjNlVlZZVzlhbmo3Z24vVHowTzVhNWFQb0dzV28xU1ZwVGtsc1VCU2ZG?= =?utf-8?B?ZWZZbkMzS0NoTk5ZOHIranNzMjRleVFpcU5MOEdlRktPYkdCTlhlZU5IRGZ5?= =?utf-8?B?b0VFUjZsQkZjVlBGeWs1NGU3dkh6cDkvYUpLOTRLOUt1Z1BLVmg5OEJsVmFR?= =?utf-8?B?ZXlNVTdkbXNaUnZGOGQwRm42TzN2QTYrbTQ3ckk0cFZ2UlZ2SHBOVS9KZytC?= =?utf-8?B?Qkp6VUV0bXltcCtBTk9HOWdFMTZhWWhWMFNTcDNZeWhoMzJ5ZkNwRkpRUWlM?= =?utf-8?B?YldZR08xTHpjN1Y1aFp3ZHZ5TjJoOEZ3ZGs1SE9OdUJieXZOb2xSM1pVVk9n?= =?utf-8?B?Q0w0N2xMWEcvb0JRbHNyYnlmL1B2T293YXltSHZPYmorWTgyZUtGK29RbEJy?= =?utf-8?B?bUNNbXlSeElKRlpHd0ZqUFNQanBITncrQThxeElxQUZZM2Q5aTZGWkgrQ29l?= =?utf-8?B?YTFVOGczY3JZRHlmYnluTWZCOFprVUdJODZsMVdDaTRFWjdCWDhxT1oxSVpT?= =?utf-8?B?U1JSSURadHFDcVVxV0d0RUhYV0Q5ZHkxaFlJeENiZFFwVGIreFJ1ZzNrditZ?= =?utf-8?B?YWdHbFBPbS9SeVM1aEt4VC85UDBwVHRndXo2b1FjUEdxd3F3SnppaU0yQjJL?= =?utf-8?B?YThFUnBBbDMxWDAwcnlXOE4vR2RaUEFlSVlnQ0lhbHVDZUE4NEwzSldoNTVI?= =?utf-8?B?RlNHSDZuMktEQnZDakhmdU5XUmFpM0JCUGJZTXNZa2NDekhKeVhzcEp3TDNj?= =?utf-8?B?S01aTVhBTENjcERBVWZydDlRSTlJWmFoejVkQmJxZHNWclpWK3ZOVVoyMFY5?= =?utf-8?B?c1lTTndwQkVvVmdpZ05kb1hGZVh0eHJybWxJV0IxNStpVkszS01ZVE5ENE1D?= =?utf-8?B?OG1pYkNyRFdrRXhka0hocThYM2ZRZkNWckdXNXlXNlMrUEhmelhZNmVxeHkz?= =?utf-8?B?RjFuUEtkWmFqOVZ5czRMQ2FZekEyUjZ6S3hhaS8zZU4vR2RwM3dmSjhMaENk?= =?utf-8?B?blFNQjM0cjdNU2NHNjgzNHh3SWlaMzZCbmMzVXhPM3Zqb1doNWYyWDRhYjVQ?= =?utf-8?B?K01wTENYbXdORjM1WEpVT1h6K2VDODZDeGo0Mm93c0IxVDZKZUc5eURlYXk1?= =?utf-8?B?NkFMdFN5RWNkOWo0Q1Z5ODhiWjl6STkyOGhqRmZwN3lOZld3aVhrcHJ4UUxp?= =?utf-8?B?YjlyclFGRS9abTgrNGpXNFVxRFhkQnFmMDhlZXdqZnpBcklzQT09?=
X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; BY2PR0501MB2149; 5:13zcDg5hWGEZHDqTH7h8M/kYhZ1rl4lw3dCLGFbBQfU99sw9r2y8BW5CdrWYJApYKdlLn2RjnciQJUqN9eAXe7dteyoql/1n+W1ISgvlMf4ZaXlf4W19751uEIpoPHCsYPeIa81y+9tkZgRsnjHS1w==; 24:y6UI/W5r1EUxyp7dpBSWAdIjVp1YnotH6FXXI89ZLXqVJBUSmUv01sM/EaKBGZbcj9eM445/t7srQjow8EnYKAqmpbJFgil8pntrS+5zhd0=
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Jan 2016 18:35:31.9517 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY2PR0501MB2149
Archived-At: 
Cc: draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-extranet@ietf.org, aretana@cisco.com, "'John G. Scudder'" , bess-chairs@ietf.org, martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com, bess@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [bess] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-extranet-04: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list 
List-Unsubscribe: , 
List-Archive: 
List-Post: 
List-Help: 
List-Subscribe: , 
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 18:35:38 -0000

--------------060506040102020103020807
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On 1/27/2016 4:37 AM, Benoit Claise wrote:
>
> This document doesn't give an operator “so-what†for deployment in 60 
> pages.
I'm afraid I don't understand this sentence.

> You know, a few summary paragraphs that indicates where this 
> specification is useful and where it is not for operators, and the 
> potential fragility of the solution (which could be in a new 
> operational consideration section or in the security considerations.
As I've been trying to explain to Sue, I don't understand what is being 
asked for in these "few summary paragraphs".   An "operator's guide to 
provisioning extranets" would be useful, but not within the scope of 
this draft.

The security considerations section already points out that 
misconfiguration of the Route Targets may result in misdelivery of 
traffic; the above text is merely a paraphrase of material that is 
already present in the document.

Note that there is no requirement to have a separate "operational 
considerations" section.

> I don't think I've seen text around coordination to set up filter, for 
> example.
Coordination to set up filters?  I don't know what you are referring to.

>
> Sue has been trying to be helpful and even proposed some text:
>
>     Whenever a VPN is provisioned, there is a risk that provisioning
>     errors will result in an unintended cross-connection of VPNs,
>     which would create a security problem for the customers.  Extranet
>     can be particularly tricky, as it intentionally cross-connects
>     VPNs, but in a manner that is intended to be strictly limited by
>     policy.  If one is connecting two VPNs that have overlapping
>     address spaces, one has to be sure that the inter-VPN traffic
>     isn't to/from the part of the address space that is in the
>     overlap. The draft discusses a lot of the corner cases, and a lot
>     of the scenarios in which things can go wrong.
>

Actually, I wrote that text in an email to Sue.  Although it too is just 
a paraphrase of existing materiaI, I could add it to the "overview" 
section as part of the description of what an extranet is.   Are you 
saying that you will lift the DISCUSS if I just add that paragraph?




--------------060506040102020103020807
Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit


  
    
  
  
    On 1/27/2016 4:37 AM, Benoit Claise wrote:

    

      
      

      
 This document doesn't give an
        operator “so-what†for deployment in 60 pages. 

    

    I'm afraid I don't understand this sentence.

    

    

      
You know, a few summary paragraphs
        that indicates where this specification is useful and where it
        is not for operators, and the potential fragility of the
        solution (which could be in a new operational consideration
        section or in the security considerations. 

    

    As I've been trying to explain to Sue, I don't understand what is
    being asked for in these "few summary paragraphs".   An "operator's
    guide to provisioning extranets" would be useful, but not within the
    scope of this draft. 

    

    The security considerations section already points out that
    misconfiguration of the Route Targets may result in misdelivery of
    traffic; the above text is merely a paraphrase of material that is
    already present in the document. 

    

    Note that there is no requirement to have a separate "operational
    considerations" section. 

    

    

      
I don't think I've seen text around
        coordination to set up filter, for example.

      

    

    Coordination to set up filters?  I don't know what you are referring
    to.

    

    

      
 

        Sue has been trying to be helpful and even proposed some text:

        
Whenever a VPN is provisioned, there is a risk that
          provisioning errors will result in an unintended
          cross-connection of VPNs, which would create a security
          problem for the customers.  Extranet can be particularly
          tricky, as it intentionally cross-connects VPNs, but in a
          manner that is intended to be strictly limited by policy.  If
          one is connecting two VPNs that have overlapping address
          spaces, one has to be sure that the inter-VPN traffic isn't
          to/from the part of the address space that is in the overlap. 
          The draft discusses a lot of the corner cases, and a lot of
          the scenarios in which things can go wrong.  

        

      

    

    

    Actually, I wrote that text in an email to Sue.  Although it too is
    just a paraphrase of existing materiaI, I could add it to the
    "overview" section as part of the description of what an extranet
    is.   Are you saying that you will lift the DISCUSS if I just add
    that paragraph?  

    

    

    

  


--------------060506040102020103020807--


From nobody Wed Jan 27 17:26:38 2016
Return-Path: 
X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C9541A00E2 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 17:26:37 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 IMb_r3awYs2D for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 17:26:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2on0131.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.100.131]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7D2181A00E1 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 17:26:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from BLUPR0501MB1715.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.163.120.18) by BLUPR0501MB1713.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.163.120.16) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.396.15; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 01:26:29 +0000
Received: from BLUPR0501MB1715.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.163.120.18]) by BLUPR0501MB1715.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.163.120.18]) with mapi id 15.01.0396.015; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 01:26:29 +0000
From: "Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang" 
To: "EXT - thomas.morin@orange.com" , BESS , "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree@tools.ietf.org" 
Thread-Topic: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree
Thread-Index: AQHRUpaMVQrN89Df00yEa17B4G+tKZ8OWnfA
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 01:26:29 +0000
Message-ID: 
References: <569DF8F7.2000703@orange.com>
In-Reply-To: <569DF8F7.2000703@orange.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=zzhang@juniper.net; 
x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.13]
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BLUPR0501MB1713; 5:miUxOb/aD2+Q7lCAnn3DFsF+/GjMiuKz97WBLyWhHj+liGi4U4yc9X5+bK0VaE/6dcHV9755BhBlkqjVOs7gtxYx6oJk4GEbkPKYx0yH08e92+Rn+Ict+VCHVyFdu3vZE+OzdF6465ePjkIsDLX3Fw==; 24:7t4tiSbbk2iGxSWvyfSrHJbL2tzGoP4XZ9s7GgjExvI8LeF3lhYmQG5APU1sowyd9tSltKg4ruc4RTYShqAZo3ETpI2b/+hbEh6XMpsTLDI=
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BLUPR0501MB1713;
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: d1f57681-2371-4919-d522-08d327820c74
x-ld-processed: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4,ExtAddr
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: 
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:;
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(3002001)(10201501046); SRVR:BLUPR0501MB1713; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BLUPR0501MB1713; 
x-forefront-prvs: 083526BF8A
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(189002)(199003)(13464003)(377424004)(377454003)(3280700002)(11100500001)(2501003)(2950100001)(5008740100001)(15975445007)(2900100001)(2906002)(77096005)(5004730100002)(33656002)(5003600100002)(5002640100001)(74316001)(101416001)(189998001)(230783001)(66066001)(54356999)(76176999)(50986999)(6116002)(102836003)(586003)(3846002)(92566002)(1096002)(1220700001)(86362001)(19580405001)(19580395003)(105586002)(106356001)(106116001)(99286002)(87936001)(10400500002)(40100003)(76576001)(5001960100002)(107886002)(97736004)(81156007)(3660700001)(5001770100001)(122556002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BLUPR0501MB1713; H:BLUPR0501MB1715.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; 
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts)
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 28 Jan 2016 01:26:29.6024 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BLUPR0501MB1713
Archived-At: 
Subject: Re: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree
X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list 
List-Unsubscribe: , 
List-Archive: 
List-Post: 
List-Help: 
List-Subscribe: , 
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 01:26:37 -0000

I was involved in relevant discussions, and have reviewed once more for thi=
s LC.

I support the publication, but with the following questions/comments.

2.1 Scenario 1: Leaf OR Root site(s) per PE

   ... If the number of EVIs is very large
   (e.g., more than 32K or 64K), then RT type 0 as defined in [RFC4360]
   SHOULD be used; otherwise, RT type 2 is sufficient.

RFC 7153 should be referenced for "Type 2".

Additionally, why is 32K mentioned? I can understand the 64k part.

   ... the MPLS-encapsulated frames MUST be tagged with an
   indication of whether they originated from a Leaf AC or not.

Perhaps change the last line to "indication if they originated from a Leaf =
AC"? Packets from a root AC are not tagged with a leaf indication.

   Other mechanisms for identifying whether an egress AC is a root or
   leaf is beyond the scope of this document.

Should "egress" be "ingress" in the above paragraph? Or simply removed?

   ... This Leaf MPLS label is advertised to other PE devices,
   using a new EVPN Extended Community called E-TREE Extended Community
   (section 5.1) along with an Ethernet A-D per ES route with ESI of
   zero and a set of Route Targets (RTs) corresponding to all the leaf
   ACs on the PE.

Perhaps change the last sentence to "... corresponding to all EVIs that hav=
e leaf sites on the PE."

3.2.3 BUM traffic originated from a multi-homed site on a leaf AC

   In this scenario, it is assumed that a multi-homed Ethernet Segment
   (ES) can have a mixed of both leaf and root ACs with each AC
   designating a subnet (e.g., a VLAN).

I understand that different VLANs on the same ES could be roots or leaves. =
I suppose it's more important to say that for the same vlan, different PEs =
on the same ES must have the same root/leaf designation.

Perhaps the first sentence could be reworded as the following to capture th=
e above point:

   While different ACs (VLANs) on the same ES could have different
   root/leaf designation (some being roots and some being leaves),
   the same VLAN does have the same root/leaf designation on all
   PEs on the same ES.

For the following:

   ... the PEs with Leaf sites perform MAC learning in the
   data-path over their Ethernet Segments, and advertise reachability in
   EVPN MAC Advertisement routes which are imported only by PEs with at
   least one Root site in the EVI. A PE with only Leaf sites will not
   import these routes. PEs with Root and/or Leaf sites may use the
   Ethernet A-D routes for aliasing (in the case of multi-homed
   segments) and for mass MAC withdrawal per [RFC 7432].

The above seems to contradict with the recommendation in Section 2.2. If th=
e context is the scenario described in section 2.1 then that's fine, but th=
e text does not have a clear context.


3.3.2 E-Tree without MAC Learning

   The PEs implementing an E-Tree service need not perform MAC learning
   when the traffic flows between Root and Leaf sites are multicast or
   broadcast.

I suppose an "only" word should be added at the end of the above sentence.=
=20

   The fields of the IMET route are populated per the procedures defined
   in [RFC7432], and the route import rules are as described in previous
   sections.

The route import rules described in previous sections are for MAC routes, n=
ot IMET routes. Additionally, those rules may not be recommended, so might =
as well delete the last sentence.

Section 3.3.1 talks about BUM procedures. That is not specific to 3.3.1 tho=
ugh. Perhaps extract that out to a separate section, and remove the BUM tex=
t from 3.3.2 as well.

   The E-TREE Extended Community is encoded as an 8-octet value as
   follows:


        0                   1                   2                   3
        0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       | Type=3D0x06     | Sub-Type=3D0x04 | Flags(1 Octet)|               =
|
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |  Reserved=3D0   |           Leaf Label                          |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

I assume the octect after the flags octet is also reserved=3D0. Better mark=
 it as "Reserved=3D0".

When it is used with Ethernet A-D per ES route, the leaf flag SHOULD be set=
 to 0 but ignored by the receiving routers. Therefore, why not set it to 1 =
to be consistent the MAC/IP route case?

Thanks.
Jeffrey

> -----Original Message-----
> From: BESS [mailto:bess-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Morin
> Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2016 3:51 AM
> To: BESS ; draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree@tools.ietf.org
> Subject: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree
>=20
> Hello Working Group,
>=20
> This email starts a Working Group Last Call on
> draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree [1] which is considered mature and ready for
> a final working group review.
>=20
> Please read the document if you haven't read the most recent version yet
> (-03), and send your comments to the list, no later than *February the
> 2nd* (2016-02-02).
>=20
> This is not only a call for comments on the document, but also a call of
> support for its publication.
>=20
> *Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that
> applies to draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree, to ensure that IPR has been
> disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669
> and 5378 for more details).
>=20
> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor of
> draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree please respond to this email and indicate
> whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR.
>=20
> Thank you,
>=20
> Thomas/Martin
>=20
> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree
>=20
> _______________________________________________
> BESS mailing list
> BESS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess


From nobody Fri Jan 29 07:22:37 2016
Return-Path: 
X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 490811A882C; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 07:22:34 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 nN6FEv3ie_Gi; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 07:22:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2on0132.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.100.132]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BFEBD1A701D; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 07:22:31 -0800 (PST)
Authentication-Results: juniper.net; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;juniper.net; dmarc=none action=none header.from=juniper.net;
Received: from [172.29.36.112] (66.129.241.14) by BLUPR0501MB2147.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.164.23.153) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.396.15; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 15:22:28 +0000
To: "Dongjie (Jimmy)" , "idr@ietf.org" , BESS , "mpls@ietf.org" 
References: <5696933E.1080802@juniper.net> <76CD132C3ADEF848BD84D028D243C92774E1CA15@NKGEML515-MBS.china.huawei.com>
From: Eric C Rosen 
Message-ID: <56AB83AF.7000200@juniper.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 10:22:23 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <76CD132C3ADEF848BD84D028D243C92774E1CA15@NKGEML515-MBS.china.huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [66.129.241.14]
X-ClientProxiedBy: BY2PR13CA0041.namprd13.prod.outlook.com (25.162.223.51) To BLUPR0501MB2147.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (25.164.23.153)
X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; BLUPR0501MB2147; 2:hjc/2NyHGjgcQMSOfgMkkWbYQAD7mWMfgjKk1fFnbtZNPni3ZZd+BW3ar2JxXe60q1Vl2uPCjgbJMlgg4+xcaZwNFLeVcKRGSpk6Sx/sEwLWWhyTAW+PHwRLJnoYESsAEEyD6iE418pOqPcjB+Z4mw==; 3:B17GEu4VF5FogC8vW9wjU9NB+ACOI/MdSFdk/2cRlPNwmEhEWV+/4ELAvo3eHJ7BtvTiK01PQqnHS7RVSE7hCNTF17XZ4Vt6G6xZaORuH1aeMdnbLApV33ae8UUCVIym; 25:1iGhMZCl4gDY3uIPJnv1CDRwfoKGGMpENF/shpx31IQCPfJdGW0mIkd4XT5BfWPRbHOhwrEHgfIbOytmiyCWL1AYpNm9b9xoAU3fS4k5eietfeRcPMjDY9szKtCPH5UmYhEhr5ng8TVHhnj3jGAE6kPcu5jJtdx4HnP6dXLIQn1ujrDln3F9McxE+YHDipNpCkMhc4f2FO/WuycKA+GCivX6WFaEYQNtEWIsJoUO3SP0WsdwEmfHAw9bVMYVXEyb
X-Microsoft-Antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BLUPR0501MB2147;
X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: 7b33fbe7-5348-4816-d7fa-08d328c000d0
X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; BLUPR0501MB2147; 20: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; 4:bO3O+mitknuLPSktMCUcMXAgAVSz1oP2vEI1j4wxicZUE0J+bNyCaLz5Pntej8xoUZn0kN/rsoPMFhSQgMVx41ZppPB0Vl0P9IiBFgD8J58NP6SFpIBKSH7RJeMK4pSOketCimySG4cas2yJ2Q5kcSglol4+HkGUMD8LRyIxTzUsJH7imbgIU1Xcuei+4e8NoVchJqLs3k3nIMZy2HO+OwLifY4dTcg1qHi5H2h/nRXEuIqSpBnSYZCVAY9ARZ0vehBiz8kVqtPUTu/z9ogkGqxMI+fQOgsi5qKyeC4lAOd7OUgcYcxEIZSE17cyonphr5P2/RoSzrCdmSmPiGlrt8lVwrH/pIMYyz8X7Uv+vvR2axWdCGMED47VImq6dt43
X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: 
X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-Test: UriScan:;
X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(3002001)(10201501046); SRVR:BLUPR0501MB2147; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BLUPR0501MB2147; 
X-Forefront-PRVS: 083691450C
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(6049001)(52604005)(377454003)(24454002)(479174004)(65816999)(65806001)(50986999)(5008740100001)(42186005)(76176999)(54356999)(4001350100001)(77096005)(86362001)(87266999)(5004730100002)(2501003)(33656002)(23746002)(36756003)(122386002)(40100003)(66066001)(65956001)(50466002)(47776003)(6116002)(64126003)(59896002)(5001960100002)(5001770100001)(92566002)(80316001)(2906002)(83506001)(107886002)(586003)(230700001)(3846002)(2950100001)(230783001)(189998001)(1096002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BLUPR0501MB2147; H:[172.29.36.112]; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:sfv; LANG:en; 
X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: =?Windows-1252?Q?1; BLUPR0501MB2147; 23:/fptYAlktrZ8rnY133ZOLK71h4gufKK+FQK?= =?Windows-1252?Q?9LDZIgV+N2I28dFxTgGWJh75TEQeNbrOf+zUNKrJQ34vTCEiF9fLJlBN?= =?Windows-1252?Q?u3FW13Kxhdff7ukGCTH23a3fLmbwimVEyPtzwFaXad1j7r8L45gNWHlO?= =?Windows-1252?Q?zx7TyQ8tTiQk9KLkBFdN7x+5I0Rfsnwyz8l1i+yVzTCaxLkuHkVKLAlb?= =?Windows-1252?Q?s0yKjDMIXjzEbshUPZUQeAJjAw5wDDJEv6eLxaPBsRzriNyKIkpXYGqK?= =?Windows-1252?Q?FmuGVJ7ObACmmHOmPX03PzT79163jxLlF5cm/PIsvv43uXF3DxJJayTj?= =?Windows-1252?Q?Krs0PxylJEx9iNHgL5YYsaVrd0QKxMIwyCvuZDAEGK5T6m4Uhaj4XCs6?= =?Windows-1252?Q?5qh0jJTN2DqBBftTkI/6lQXgV9USupHnGrV/OSktTSxp8V+VfoWdNtC8?= =?Windows-1252?Q?MSD/UmnhPcHCLcV1amp2bCvyovGEP/32oUMDjRupaWHiyXb72Hh+7Ag1?= =?Windows-1252?Q?Uuzx04XO3+vZiTVZHtjKzDsegNegt9Rq+HomYwB5zDmI5HtoDn3GMXw2?= =?Windows-1252?Q?05qBnX99/In5hDtdHoflcAQMYg8hM3RPlDVfFKq0N1ePsMqIVSPlPwD6?= =?Windows-1252?Q?6XWif+pB0Z1dLad0J/sBO401h5fVb/W2dvkhpdxGDN8rSEXbmWW+ckeN?= =?Windows-1252?Q?0xsja/tH4QaUtrcv+OK0oAxBWBAhU5xCIbxk+riOpNeuEt90lw2cXBZT?= =?Windows-1252?Q?txsrPvjIkq+Dxff1eub14P4weAsKqRiPQIfTW3q+45+OLbwSlf2KZo6G?= =?Windows-1252?Q?hbOHlEjUAdkrjcRjeUKugED4dmsGqbK2cbEp4AuWg0VTC+/R5yt3tEyX?= =?Windows-1252?Q?GlscGQPmT1cgYWMzNF2I+ni+lBOsgDcqBbQZJ8zZkXE5Jol8rxSF7Mo4?= =?Windows-1252?Q?8kcjVyo/PNdR72+VIDYYbnRpzeSy2JJrsvwsGV1/JraLBlWTkxcb/tUn?= =?Windows-1252?Q?mNVluOzVPGvGQf4T1O/TFxTIK20B6yT0UtFXyOYtt/WAtBdFWOcivltd?= =?Windows-1252?Q?WYnuZOAbjHTH9e4n+NpsZOs6R7a49UB+VoxYidmtSCzuoDZqLyvJ7ZME?= =?Windows-1252?Q?olcc4meCZlzMVxM7l0Lul9PQebAhHjTomhyKJUv3Qz4XRNUaZPLI2N/u?= =?Windows-1252?Q?yqwWYekNeMZ0q6+oAVf/3j8xEI8+MPQ0NL/9jw6cBpNMNHnTQq2otEHR?= =?Windows-1252?Q?ETuPwk0+1AHt2EfCVmaPJITouijGE6Jxb+aBBEBc=3D?=
X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; BLUPR0501MB2147; 5:hiRwp9HgXyqCUKevIe1ZoTCkUec6QOtYMkPlAw2CLhNVlA0B9S8wk0vblhUzoFqfuMLTQ1w2LLo+P5+TwW8AwjVStkHhD0WVAM7GeqqY9zoBH+O6GNmqgPLKUN/o14aigOH3+ClbEf3v/8gZmmy0CA==; 24:34yujGoL9r9OyxHZGZ+uYM/qvgkrlYkiKaArWcoQ1p55DfVZrv7jmAKGk6U8NjBcfb+cLRjhBLzaBboPSAbPqr6DIrZExxXTq2J1gMjL6TA=
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Jan 2016 15:22:28.9546 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BLUPR0501MB2147
Archived-At: 
Subject: Re: [bess] draft-rosen-idr-rfc3107bis-00
X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list 
List-Unsubscribe: , 
List-Archive: 
List-Post: 
List-Help: 
List-Subscribe: , 
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 15:22:34 -0000

Thanks for reviewing the draft!

On 1/26/2016 2:47 AM, Dongjie (Jimmy) wrote:
> 1. For NLRI encoding with single label, this draft says that "the S bit MUST be set to one on transmission". IMO RFC 3107 does not mandate this, and as you said some existing implementations may not set the S bit. To ensure backward compatibility, maybe the requirement on setting the S bit can be relaxed.
RFC3107 does allow the NLRI to contain multiple labels, but the only way 
you can tell how many labels there are is by looking for the S bit.  So 
I think the setting of the S bit really is required by RFC 3107, even 
though the RFC doesn't make that very clear.

I believe that some implementations check for the S bit and some do 
not.  I also believe that most implementations set the S bit, but I'm 
not sure if all do.  Thus I think the strategy of "set the S bit on 
transmission but ignore it on reception" is most likely to result in 
multi-vendor interoperability.

This does mean that an old implementation that doesn't set the S bit 
would be non-compliant with 3107bis.  However, it would interoperate 
with compliant implementations, and that's what really matters.

I didn't want to say "SHOULD set the S bit", because that leaves it open 
for new implementations to leave the S bit unset, and that might result 
in interoperability problems with older implementations that do check 
for the S bit.
>
> 2. For NLRI encoding with multiple labels, I guess the beginning of the prefix field is identified based on the S bit of the last label. If a malformed NLRI is received, in which the S bit of the last label is not set, then the prefix cannot be recognized, and the treat-as-withdraw error handling is not applicable. This may be worth mentioned in the draft.
Excellent point.  I'll add something about this, with a reference to 
section 3j of RFC 7606.
>
> 3. Section 2.5 describes implicit withdrawn and load balancing in detail. One possible issue here is it seems that the same next hop is required for the routes in Update U1 and U2. While section 9 of RFC 4271 specifies:
>
>     "...if the NLRI of the new route is identical to the one the route currently has stored in the Adj-RIB-In, then the new route SHALL replace the older route in the Adj-RIB-In, thus implicitly withdrawing the older route from service."
>
> Thus same next hop is not required for implicit withdrawn. This also applies to the load balancing case with Add_Path, in which the 2 paths used for load balancing may have different next hops.
Section 2.5 is intended to address only the case where the next hop 
doesn't change.  When the next hop does change, the procedures from RFC 
4271 apply as usual.  I'll try to make this clear.


From nobody Sun Jan 31 08:14:03 2016
Return-Path: 
X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CC921A871E for ; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 08:14:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.502
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.502 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, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 rkHeqKnYQIIT for ; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 08:14:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-7.cisco.com (alln-iport-7.cisco.com [173.37.142.94]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BEE311A8025 for ; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 08:14:00 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2496; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1454256840; x=1455466440; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-id:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=SK3qai4Ef/08tN2G/VuqSIGmXM3Gm1yCFbsyjkpXMds=; b=AZ22kG4PTBCKD0U/wpIv8U4cj+BmquCQeIoQvyqx2MP38mfhLfKXx2w7 PHxspBKqAqJaXRjCag/9kluiWfZXG7iqgYYwZgq41qE2LJBAXe/feae4p pwK/08ODhN70xWNFOIp1iW2UB5ZU0rVyHKsd6gtPA/z8iXhFER8VOG4e8 8=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0D2AQBeMq5W/49dJa1dgzpSbQaIUrE3A?= =?us-ascii?q?Q2BYxgKhW0CHIEGOBQBAQEBAQEBgQqEQgEBBAEBARoXOhsCAQgYBCgCAiULJQI?= =?us-ascii?q?EARKIGw6RZZ0LBo45AQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARMEdYUahDeEAhEBNIJkg?= =?us-ascii?q?UAFlm8BhUaIBIFbhEKDJYUuimyDUQEeAQFCg2xqh000fAEBAQ?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,376,1449532800"; d="scan'208";a="233317549"
Received: from rcdn-core-7.cisco.com ([173.37.93.143]) by alln-iport-7.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 31 Jan 2016 16:13:59 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-001.cisco.com (xch-rtp-001.cisco.com [64.101.220.141]) by rcdn-core-7.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u0VGDxBD011138 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Sun, 31 Jan 2016 16:13:59 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-012.cisco.com (64.101.220.152) by XCH-RTP-001.cisco.com (64.101.220.141) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 11:13:58 -0500
Received: from xch-rtp-012.cisco.com ([64.101.220.152]) by XCH-RTP-012.cisco.com ([64.101.220.152]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 11:13:58 -0500
From: "Satya Mohanty (satyamoh)" 
To: "Ali Sajassi (sajassi)" , "thomas.morin@orange.com" , BESS , "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree@tools.ietf.org" 
Thread-Topic: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree
Thread-Index: AQHRUpaOQH33PsUgFECs4wPiqi207J8MFHCAgAmY2gA=
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2016 16:13:58 +0000
Message-ID: 
References: <569DF8F7.2000703@orange.com> 
In-Reply-To: 
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.24.100.129]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="euc-kr"
Content-ID: <41B365B5613D3243A2EAFE37BA892A1B@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: 
Subject: Re: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree
X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list 
List-Unsubscribe: , 
List-Archive: 
List-Post: 
List-Help: 
List-Subscribe: , 
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2016 16:14:02 -0000
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From nobody Sun Jan 31 08:48:28 2016
Return-Path: 
X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C0DD1ACD14 for ; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 08:48:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=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 xZiI1jEMkidK for ; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 08:48:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ig0-x22c.google.com (mail-ig0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5F7D31ACD12 for ; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 08:48:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ig0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id z14so19641968igp.1 for ; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 08:48:25 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;  h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=njiFFR8hgeLzdwlxuFwLDsoL9RB/NDlpzkvw9EGs0es=; b=SAtiZwzTW1sIpea2+zBq9rLFYS+kNrtNTcgzjHT4Ofdzo9U7Pje0BU5Y9mH7Wi9wHj UCdYRC+xZeprr1Yoq/etxvxLSPBcnYQh0hpmMiOrQhinZeP84w2XT6pyl5FigtRp2ERe OiOsl087G+h7F5BcoNfA3n8mU3+1AvPf72fe4ST1/2JgMbZGhslz66WghsSjfxgxxqIU Ebadw51SUdoDPlc736cxjU77foMOQgoMZxjJnYG8bKVSFQ3GlMJ3Uv1xySYswgxJNbVe mFd7TGZeChxRsi5ovK3BHxnm0O3cbCeCRBTxZio7lv1L0L7+xOzJVFUJ1mcd0lNoJxrO RPQw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=njiFFR8hgeLzdwlxuFwLDsoL9RB/NDlpzkvw9EGs0es=; b=BTG3rBoUETG2AUQu05O7NrNZ7xkyKb5OmSvxCH1jPZpGPjQl4LJw2vGQWU06A/vWFT nmOyfM0HNLBLbq0oNg2FEaNfjO881D4ACVPS+EYzhxz3UvTQvORGxCjJYTS+NIQtKvGZ 6afzffHab7UNH9FQ2y/htBvWLHPk3Y4YoA5HyVMXgi4RS9wKRqxD80SKWam1NMuYrVjM qarQTaR/k0HAIOisKNC0Sel5zbgizJ0TQ2iQoX/I3Gm5jsNZF5pl/Lbjsab2d2+OoaEZ gBfSZQON1/nOU+iiCkYjpOahEs4cJhULdIkcDyLzM2ttqAvOS8t43xsVIF/WXndrqDxA Fxug==
X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YORClFMxOSzJ105fMpVjxEsr+9JQXntUDrFWW1hsoaSSkKH2sRFRc8k6+cJRKfBNWm/XenB6t9CMSTlOXQ==
X-Received: by 10.50.92.41 with SMTP id cj9mr7054947igb.38.1454258904757; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 08:48:24 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <56A72A83.10906@orange.com>
In-Reply-To: <56A72A83.10906@orange.com>
From: Aldrin Isaac 
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2016 16:48:15 +0000
Message-ID: 
To: Thomas Morin , bess@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8f2345756dfd3d052aa40934
Archived-At: 
Cc: draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-02
X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list 
List-Unsubscribe: , 
List-Archive: 
List-Post: 
List-Help: 
List-Subscribe: , 
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2016 16:48:27 -0000

--e89a8f2345756dfd3d052aa40934
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Support as co-author. IETF should adopt this use-case -- optimized
multi-destination forwarding for overlays where multicast support is not
available in the underlay. I am not aware of any related IPR.

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 12:12 AM Thomas Morin 
wrote:

> Hello working group,
>
> This email starts a two-week poll on adopting
> draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-02 [1] as a working group item.
>
> Please send comments to the list and state if you support adoption or
> not (in the later case, please also state the reasons).
>
> This poll runs until **February 9th**.
>
>
> *Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that
> applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in
> compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669
> and 5378 for more details).
>
> ==> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please
> respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any
> relevant IPR.
>
> The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from
> each author and contributor.
>
> If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please
> explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet
> been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Martin & Thomas
> bess chairs
>
> [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-02
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> BESS mailing list
> BESS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
>

--e89a8f2345756dfd3d052aa40934
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Support as co-author.  IETF should adop=
t this use-case -- optimized multi-destination forwarding for overlays wher=
e multicast support is not available in the underlay. I am not aware of any=
 related IPR.

On Tue, =
Jan 26, 2016 at 12:12 AM Thomas Morin <thomas.morin@orange.com> wrote:
Hello working group,



This email starts a two-week poll on adopting

draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-02 [1] as a working group item.



Please send comments to the list and state if you support adoption or

not (in the later case, please also state the reasons).



This poll runs until **February 9th**.





*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that

applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in

compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669

and 5378 for more details).



=3D=3D> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please
respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any

relevant IPR.



The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from

each author and contributor.



If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please

explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet

been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules.



Thank you,



Martin & Thomas

bess chairs



[1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/d=
raft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-02



























_______________________________________________

BESS mailing list

BESS@ietf.org

https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess




--e89a8f2345756dfd3d052aa40934--


From nobody Sun Jan 31 09:30:47 2016
Return-Path: 
X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A60B51B2A14 for ; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 09:30:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 GXH-SXurdxVz for ; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 09:30:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2on0121.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.100.121]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CA7EA1B2A27 for ; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 09:30:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from BN1PR05MB939.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.255.206.14) by BN1PR05MB937.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.255.205.15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.396.15; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 17:30:40 +0000
Received: from BN1PR05MB939.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.255.206.14]) by BN1PR05MB939.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.255.206.14]) with mapi id 15.01.0396.017; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 17:30:40 +0000
From: Ravi Shekhar 
To: Aldrin Isaac 
Thread-Topic: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-02
Thread-Index: AQHRXEc5RhOCoQb1MUuSBqKUiH8ZNZ8V4afE
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2016 17:30:40 +0000
Message-ID: <7d90f2e0-f400-46ab-a01b-2755f1687435@email.android.com>
References: <56A72A83.10906@orange.com>, 
In-Reply-To: 
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
authentication-results: gmail.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;gmail.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=juniper.net;
x-originating-ip: [2602:306:ce97:c970:9446:a8af:e081:7dbc]
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BN1PR05MB937; 5:+dhTf1HaSlt9rP+MvyDHLkhUd4JnlmrUy2XBvQVSCxdWksWcBqyT9M5w3syjhio3k84xY0WGXwlS1jIzovOQyF/7o1YPUbb+kJvy4eFXYYVmAu6cR0eKHotKBN4pqCELopFKlDl2W0PTJm2biJWlIQ==; 24:2aXoxMODxToq/MAF/9ICi48u6EpCXhPdS/dJCsD6YrWgjo3/ZiSsNxEPTgQ7buKYRq8aJMX+4xP17k52KFk2NUcPBVUhTWndWhVbk3MQ2DE=
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BN1PR05MB937;
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 4241ea6c-4236-46af-c5e8-08d32a643d73
x-ld-processed: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4,ExtAddr
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: 
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:;
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(3002001)(10201501046); SRVR:BN1PR05MB937; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BN1PR05MB937; 
x-forefront-prvs: 08381C729B
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(24454002)(377454003)(5002640100001)(99286002)(4326007)(76176999)(50986999)(87936001)(40100003)(54356999)(31686004)(122556002)(92566002)(106116001)(2906002)(1220700001)(19617315012)(1096002)(19580405001)(19580395003)(189998001)(230783001)(102836003)(15975445007)(86362001)(10400500002)(2900100001)(2950100001)(5001960100002)(586003)(16236675004)(77096005)(5004730100002)(31696002)(11100500001)(3280700002)(33646002)(3470700001)(6116002)(5008740100001)(3660700001)(110136002)(3826002)(6055255003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BN1PR05MB937; H:BN1PR05MB939.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:sfv; LANG:en; 
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_7d90f2e0f40046aba01b2755f1687435emailandroidcom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 31 Jan 2016 17:30:40.4059 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BN1PR05MB937
Archived-At: 
Cc: "EXT - thomas.morin@orange.com" , "bess@ietf.org" , "draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir@tools.ietf.org" 
Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption:	draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-02
X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list 
List-Unsubscribe: , 
List-Archive: 
List-Post: 
List-Help: 
List-Subscribe: , 
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2016 17:30:45 -0000

--_000_7d90f2e0f40046aba01b2755f1687435emailandroidcom_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Support as co-author. A solution without percolating multicast forwarding s=
tate on every device in the core or edge is very desirable. Not aware of an=
y IPR.

- Ravi Shekhar.

On Jan 31, 2016 8:48 AM, Aldrin Isaac  wrote:
Support as co-author. IETF should adopt this use-case -- optimized multi-de=
stination forwarding for overlays where multicast support is not available =
in the underlay. I am not aware of any related IPR.

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 12:12 AM Thomas Morin > wrote:
Hello working group,

This email starts a two-week poll on adopting
draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-02 [1] as a working group item.

Please send comments to the list and state if you support adoption or
not (in the later case, please also state the reasons).

This poll runs until **February 9th**.


*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that
applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in
compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669
and 5378 for more details).

=3D=3D> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please
respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any
relevant IPR.

The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from
each author and contributor.

If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please
explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet
been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules.

Thank you,

Martin & Thomas
bess chairs

[1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-02













_______________________________________________
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

--_000_7d90f2e0f40046aba01b2755f1687435emailandroidcom_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable








Support as co-author. A solution without percolating multica=
st forwarding state on every device in the core or edge is very desirable. =
Not aware of any IPR.


- Ravi Shekhar.


On Jan 31, 2016 8:48 AM, Aldrin Isaac <aldrin=
.isaac@gmail.com> wrote:






Support as co-author. IETF should adopt=
 this use-case -- optimized multi-destination forwarding for overlays where=
 multicast support is not available in the underlay. I am not aware of any =
related IPR.






On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 12:12 AM Thomas Morin <thomas.morin@orange.com> wrote:<=
br>




Hello working group,



This email starts a two-week poll on adopting

draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-02 [1] as a working group item.



Please send comments to the list and state if you support adoption or

not (in the later case, please also state the reasons).



This poll runs until **February 9th**.





*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that

applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in

compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669

and 5378 for more details).



=3D=3D> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please
respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any

relevant IPR.



The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from

each author and contributor.



If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please

explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet

been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules.



Thank you,



Martin & Thomas

bess chairs



[1] 
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-02



























_______________________________________________

BESS mailing list

BESS@ietf.org

https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess










--_000_7d90f2e0f40046aba01b2755f1687435emailandroidcom_--


From nobody Sun Jan 31 18:53:24 2016
Return-Path: 
X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 702901A88C9 for ; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 18:53:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.502
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.502 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, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 XRT2rW-4YOmU for ; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 18:53:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-6.cisco.com (alln-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.142.93]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A34171A88D0 for ; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 18:53:20 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3314; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1454295200; x=1455504800; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-id:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=WfBPpKLoo+ZtRoUxntyoo/R9TymFPPZdwT43S8ljse8=; b=caY9JKRvJg3csTouUgi5rvvs0ag4GwDIkRd/UXe/Po1hY3n4jamL68OG ojIXIqtZ9wKsW+CtrlV2wt/kagjbnvhJMPCKoXWz6IkNH8T800vlxeO5v 9GcuQMOsSjU3mpCythBt3oPNDFOAN0MRUnDoZuSe1Imm4xrQwXl+2AR3r Q=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0ADAgBQyK5W/5ldJa1egzpSbQaIUrE+A?= =?us-ascii?q?Q2BYxgKhW0CgSk4FAEBAQEBAQGBCoRBAQEBBAEBARpRFwQCAQgRBAEBAScHJws?= =?us-ascii?q?UCQgCBAESFIgHDrwbAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBEQSKRoQCEQEchDwFj?= =?us-ascii?q?V2JEgGFRogEgVuEQoMlhS6KbINRAR4BAUKDbGoBh0w0fAEBAQ?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,378,1449532800"; d="scan'208";a="233362278"
Received: from rcdn-core-2.cisco.com ([173.37.93.153]) by alln-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 01 Feb 2016 02:53:19 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-003.cisco.com (xch-rtp-003.cisco.com [64.101.220.143]) by rcdn-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u112rJWh005156 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 1 Feb 2016 02:53:19 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-005.cisco.com (64.101.220.145) by XCH-RTP-003.cisco.com (64.101.220.143) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 21:53:18 -0500
Received: from xch-rtp-005.cisco.com ([64.101.220.145]) by XCH-RTP-005.cisco.com ([64.101.220.145]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 21:53:18 -0500
From: "Ali Sajassi (sajassi)" 
To: Poorna Pushkala B , Wen Lin , "EXT - thomas.morin@orange.com" , "'BESS'" , "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree@tools.ietf.org" 
Thread-Topic: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree
Thread-Index: AQHRUpaME/U9KT8MU0ut9l7k3idEc58MIOcAgAA4RgCAAYa1AIAIgBGA
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2016 02:53:18 +0000
Message-ID: 
References: <569DF8F7.2000703@orange.com> <000301d15763$0b0c4f70$2124ee50$@com>  <9D19FA16-D2F7-49F1-8E8A-C124DC0735F7@juniper.net>
In-Reply-To: <9D19FA16-D2F7-49F1-8E8A-C124DC0735F7@juniper.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.5.8.151023
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.19.76.53]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-ID: <4EC67B6879DD2845A55B56EA93E5CA58@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: 
Subject: Re: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree
X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list 
List-Unsubscribe: , 
List-Archive: 
List-Post: 
List-Help: 
List-Subscribe: , 
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Feb 2016 02:53:22 -0000

Thanks. This has already been noted and IANA section has been updated
accordingly.

Cheers,
Ali=20


On 1/26/16, 11:04 AM, "BESS on behalf of Poorna Pushkala B"
 wrote:

>Hi
>
>In section 5.1 of version 3 of the draft, the subtype is mentioned as
>=B30x05=B2, whereas the figure below shows it as =B30x04=B2.
>Can the authors kindly fix it? Thanks.
>
>Regards
>Poorna
>
>
>5.1=20
>
>E-TREE Extended Community
>
>   This Extended Community is a new transitive Extended Community having
>   a Type field value of 0x06 (EVPN) and the Sub-Type 0x05.
>
>
>        0                   1                   2                   3
>        0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
>       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>       | Type=3D0x06     | Sub-Type=3D0x04 | Flags(1 Octet)|              =
 |
>       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>       |  Reserved=3D0   |           Leaf Label                          |
>       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>
>
>
>
>
>On 1/25/16, 9:46 AM, "Wen Lin"  wrote:
>
>>Fully support as a co-author. I am not aware of any un-disclosed IPR.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Wen
>>
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: BESS [mailto:bess-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Morin
>>>Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2016 2:51 AM
>>>To: BESS; draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree@tools.ietf.org
>>>Subject: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree
>>>
>>>Hello Working Group,
>>>
>>>This email starts a Working Group Last Call on
>>>draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree
>>>[1] which is considered mature and ready for a final working group
>>>review.
>>>
>>>Please read the document if you haven't read the most recent version yet
>>>(-03), and send your comments to the list, no later than *February the
>>>2nd* (2016-02-02).
>>>
>>>This is not only a call for comments on the document, but also a call of
>>>support for its publication.
>>>
>>>*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that
>>>applies
>>>to draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in
>>>compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for
>>>more
>>>details).
>>>
>>>*If* you are listed as a document author or contributor of
>>>draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree please respond to this email and indicate
>>>whether
>>>or not you are aware of any relevant IPR.
>>>
>>>Thank you,
>>>
>>>Thomas/Martin
>>>
>>>[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>BESS mailing list
>>>BESS@ietf.org
>>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>BESS mailing list
>>>BESS@ietf.org
>>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>BESS mailing list
>>BESS@ietf.org
>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
>_______________________________________________
>BESS mailing list
>BESS@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess


From nobody Sun Jan 31 23:03:43 2016
Return-Path: 
X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 063E91B2D18 for ; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 23:03:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.502
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.502 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, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 9U0O-0p7i9LF for ; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 23:03:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-5.cisco.com (alln-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.142.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B17E91B29EE for ; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 23:03:38 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=7801; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1454310218; x=1455519818; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-id:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=Nv+jM7h68JCeapaQ1QpwBSgLBR1SUS8FSf5HQRg8Gsw=; b=CDPJuQs/dM1D7FQ2n+ud8VctvXWDJhGTtDJHDZiSovz0fCDnuVlCKwwz CHW1X+ypvmcrItXUZ2dj5VtubLPqLMmrmFZHSLwpdN7YE2MFcTrpnEpH1 jKYb5/uKk3XPTw5+pFExTQW51RRvQH6Ln+WKoQBRLkzMWck8axN/epoto M=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0D2AQAzAq9W/5FdJa1dgzpSbQaIUrFTA?= =?us-ascii?q?Q2BYxgKhW0CgSw4FAEBAQEBAQGBCoRBAQEBAwEBAQEaUAEXBAIBCBEEAQEoByc?= =?us-ascii?q?LFAkIAgQBEhSHfwgOvCUBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQERBIpGhAIRARyEP?= =?us-ascii?q?AWSbIQDAYVGiASBW4RCgyWFLopsg1EBHgEBQoNsaodNNHwBAQE?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,379,1449532800"; d="scan'208";a="231686300"
Received: from rcdn-core-9.cisco.com ([173.37.93.145]) by alln-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 01 Feb 2016 07:03:37 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-004.cisco.com (xch-rtp-004.cisco.com [64.101.220.144]) by rcdn-core-9.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u1173bU5015388 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 1 Feb 2016 07:03:37 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-005.cisco.com (64.101.220.145) by XCH-RTP-004.cisco.com (64.101.220.144) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Mon, 1 Feb 2016 02:03:36 -0500
Received: from xch-rtp-005.cisco.com ([64.101.220.145]) by XCH-RTP-005.cisco.com ([64.101.220.145]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Mon, 1 Feb 2016 02:03:36 -0500
From: "Ali Sajassi (sajassi)" 
To: "Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang" , "EXT - thomas.morin@orange.com" , BESS , "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree@tools.ietf.org" 
Thread-Topic: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree
Thread-Index: AQHRUpaME/U9KT8MU0ut9l7k3idEc58OWnfAgAhLYwA=
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2016 07:03:36 +0000
Message-ID: 
References: <569DF8F7.2000703@orange.com> 
In-Reply-To: 
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.5.8.151023
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.19.76.53]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-ID: 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: 
Subject: Re: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree
X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list 
List-Unsubscribe: , 
List-Archive: 
List-Post: 
List-Help: 
List-Subscribe: , 
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Feb 2016 07:03:41 -0000

Hi Jeffrey,

Thanks for the review. Your comments helps tighten the draft some more. I
have updated the draft and will publish it next (rev04). Majority of the
comments were editorial in nature for better clarifications. Since the
existing draft (rev03) reflects the consensus regarding our several rounds
of discussions where we have taken care of the technical items, it is
consistent with our expectation of not seeing any major issue during the
LC. Please refer to my replies in line.

Cheers,
Ali
=20

On 1/27/16, 5:26 PM, "BESS on behalf of Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang"
 wrote:

>I was involved in relevant discussions, and have reviewed once more for
>this LC.
>
>I support the publication, but with the following questions/comments.
>
>2.1 Scenario 1: Leaf OR Root site(s) per PE
>
>   ... If the number of EVIs is very large
>   (e.g., more than 32K or 64K), then RT type 0 as defined in [RFC4360]
>   SHOULD be used; otherwise, RT type 2 is sufficient.
>
>RFC 7153 should be referenced for "Type 2".


Done.

>
>Additionally, why is 32K mentioned? I can understand the 64k part.

Removed 32K since the example is clear enough with 64K

>
>   ... the MPLS-encapsulated frames MUST be tagged with an
>   indication of whether they originated from a Leaf AC or not.
>
>Perhaps change the last line to "indication if they originated from a
>Leaf AC"? Packets from a root AC are not tagged with a leaf indication.

OK. Better yet. It should say =B3indication when they originated from a lea=
f
AC=B2.

>
>   Other mechanisms for identifying whether an egress AC is a root or
>   leaf is beyond the scope of this document.
>
>Should "egress" be "ingress" in the above paragraph? Or simply removed?

Nice catch! It is =B3ingress=B2. It is now corrected.

>
>   ... This Leaf MPLS label is advertised to other PE devices,
>   using a new EVPN Extended Community called E-TREE Extended Community
>   (section 5.1) along with an Ethernet A-D per ES route with ESI of
>   zero and a set of Route Targets (RTs) corresponding to all the leaf
>   ACs on the PE.
>
>Perhaps change the last sentence to "... corresponding to all EVIs that
>have leaf sites on the PE."

The second to last sentence of section 3.2.1 says the same thing. I
changed this sentence and removed the 2nd to last sentence.

>
>3.2.3 BUM traffic originated from a multi-homed site on a leaf AC
>
>   In this scenario, it is assumed that a multi-homed Ethernet Segment
>   (ES) can have a mixed of both leaf and root ACs with each AC
>   designating a subnet (e.g., a VLAN).
>
>I understand that different VLANs on the same ES could be roots or
>leaves. I suppose it's more important to say that for the same vlan,
>different PEs on the same ES must have the same root/leaf designation.

That=B9s given.

>
>Perhaps the first sentence could be reworded as the following to capture
>the above point:
>
>   While different ACs (VLANs) on the same ES could have different
>   root/leaf designation (some being roots and some being leaves),
>   the same VLAN does have the same root/leaf designation on all
>   PEs on the same ES.

That=B9s fine. It makes it more clear.

>
>For the following:
>
>   ... the PEs with Leaf sites perform MAC learning in the
>   data-path over their Ethernet Segments, and advertise reachability in
>   EVPN MAC Advertisement routes which are imported only by PEs with at
>   least one Root site in the EVI. A PE with only Leaf sites will not
>   import these routes. PEs with Root and/or Leaf sites may use the
>   Ethernet A-D routes for aliasing (in the case of multi-homed
>   segments) and for mass MAC withdrawal per [RFC 7432].
>
>The above seems to contradict with the recommendation in Section 2.2. If
>the context is the scenario described in section 2.1 then that's fine,
>but the text does not have a clear context.

Agreed. Updated the section to indicate the context is section 2.1.

>
>
>3.3.2 E-Tree without MAC Learning
>
>   The PEs implementing an E-Tree service need not perform MAC learning
>   when the traffic flows between Root and Leaf sites are multicast or
>   broadcast.
>
>I suppose an "only" word should be added at the end of the above sentence.

Agreed.

>=20
>
>   The fields of the IMET route are populated per the procedures defined
>   in [RFC7432], and the route import rules are as described in previous
>   sections.
>
>The route import rules described in previous sections are for MAC routes,
>not IMET routes. Additionally, those rules may not be recommended, so
>might as well delete the last sentence.

Changed the last sentence to =B3=8A, and the multicast tunnel setup criteri=
a
are as described in the previous section.=B2

>
>Section 3.3.1 talks about BUM procedures. That is not specific to 3.3.1
>though. Perhaps extract that out to a separate section, and remove the
>BUM text from 3.3.2 as well.

I think it is OK.

>
>   The E-TREE Extended Community is encoded as an 8-octet value as
>   follows:
>
>
>        0                   1                   2                   3
>        0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
>       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>       | Type=3D0x06     | Sub-Type=3D0x04 | Flags(1 Octet)|              =
 |
>       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>       |  Reserved=3D0   |           Leaf Label                          |
>       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>
>I assume the octect after the flags octet is also reserved=3D0. Better mar=
k
>it as "Reserved=3D0".

Agreed.

>
>When it is used with Ethernet A-D per ES route, the leaf flag SHOULD be
>set to 0 but ignored by the receiving routers. Therefore, why not set it
>to 1 to be consistent the MAC/IP route case?

Because the flag is used for known unicast traffic and Leaf label for BUM
traffic. We don=B9t want to mix the two.

Cheers,
Ali=20

>
>Thanks.
>Jeffrey
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: BESS [mailto:bess-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Morin
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2016 3:51 AM
>> To: BESS ; draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree@tools.ietf.org
>> Subject: [bess] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree
>>=20
>> Hello Working Group,
>>=20
>> This email starts a Working Group Last Call on
>> draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree [1] which is considered mature and ready for
>> a final working group review.
>>=20
>> Please read the document if you haven't read the most recent version yet
>> (-03), and send your comments to the list, no later than *February the
>> 2nd* (2016-02-02).
>>=20
>> This is not only a call for comments on the document, but also a call of
>> support for its publication.
>>=20
>> *Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that
>> applies to draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree, to ensure that IPR has been
>> disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669
>> and 5378 for more details).
>>=20
>> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor of
>> draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree please respond to this email and indicate
>> whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR.
>>=20
>> Thank you,
>>=20
>> Thomas/Martin
>>=20
>> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree
>>=20
>> _______________________________________________
>> BESS mailing list
>> BESS@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
>
>_______________________________________________
>BESS mailing list
>BESS@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess


From nobody Sun Jan 31 23:09:55 2016
Return-Path: 
X-Original-To: bess@ietf.org
Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55F5D1B2D63; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 23:09:54 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: internet-drafts@ietf.org
To: 
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.13.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <20160201070954.7018.90701.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2016 23:09:54 -0800
Archived-At: 
Cc: bess@ietf.org
Subject: [bess] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree-04.txt
X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list 
List-Unsubscribe: , 
List-Archive: 
List-Post: 
List-Help: 
List-Subscribe: , 
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Feb 2016 07:09:54 -0000

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
 This draft is a work item of the BGP Enabled Services Working Group of the IETF.

        Title           : E-TREE Support in EVPN & PBB-EVPN
        Authors         : Ali Sajassi
                          Samer Salam
                          Sami Boutros
                          Jim Uttaro
	Filename        : draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree-04.txt
	Pages           : 16
	Date            : 2016-01-31

Abstract:
   The Metro Ethernet Forum (MEF) has defined a rooted-multipoint
   Ethernet service known as Ethernet Tree (E-Tree).  [ETREE-FMWK]
   proposes a solution framework for supporting this service in MPLS
   networks. This document discusses how those functional requirements
   can be easily met with (PBB-)EVPN and how (PBB-)EVPN offers a more
   efficient implementation of these functions.



The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree/

There's also a htmlized version available at:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree-04

A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree-04


Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/