From loa@pi.nu Tue May 1 09:32:05 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D28C121E81A5 for ; Tue, 1 May 2012 09:32:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.566 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.566 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.033, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Iy60FBbc7qCr for ; Tue, 1 May 2012 09:32:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.pi.nu (mail.pi.nu [194.71.127.148]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38BAA21E816B for ; Tue, 1 May 2012 09:32:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.64] (81-236-221-144-no93.tbcn.telia.com [81.236.221.144]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by mail.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9FEB92A8002; Tue, 1 May 2012 18:32:03 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4FA01005.1080002@pi.nu> Date: Tue, 01 May 2012 18:32:05 +0200 From: Loa Andersson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120420 Thunderbird/12.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "mpls@ietf.org" , "mpls-ads@tools.ietf.org" , "mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [mpls] The MPLS WG Review Team X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 May 2012 16:32:05 -0000 Working Group, The working group chairs have discussed the comparatively high number of drafts on queue to become working groups drafts, and decided that we need help in evaluating drafts before we poll them to become working documents. We have asked some of the more active and experienced working group members to be part of a Review Team. Each member will review some documents before the Vancouver meeting. The review team will be set up as an experiment through the Vancouver meeting and after evaluation, the chairs will decide whether the experiment will be made permanent. The reviewers will be asked comment on whether the document is coherent, if is it useful (ie, is it likely to be actually useful in operational networks), and is the document technically sound? Reviews should be sent to the document authors, WG co-chairs and secretary, and be CC'd to the MPLS WG email list. If necessary, comments may be sent privately to only the WG chairs. Thanks, George, Loa, and Ross WG co-chairs -- Loa Andersson email: loa.andersson@ericsson.com Sr Strategy and Standards Manager loa@pi.nu Ericsson Inc phone: +46 10 717 52 13 +46 767 72 92 13 From kireeti@juniper.net Tue May 1 11:21:43 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 416E621E811B for ; Tue, 1 May 2012 11:21:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.509 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.509 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.090, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qzV0FDsEGbto for ; Tue, 1 May 2012 11:21:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from exprod7og106.obsmtp.com (exprod7og106.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.165]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30EF021E80BB for ; Tue, 1 May 2012 11:21:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from P-EMHUB03-HQ.jnpr.net ([66.129.224.36]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob106.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKT6AptSlLzmPIFzVwbMLfhGXjzm6RSlYk@postini.com; Tue, 01 May 2012 11:21:42 PDT Received: from EMBX01-HQ.jnpr.net ([fe80::c821:7c81:f21f:8bc7]) by P-EMHUB03-HQ.jnpr.net ([::1]) with mapi; Tue, 1 May 2012 11:19:09 -0700 From: Kireeti Kompella To: "mpls@ietf.org" Date: Tue, 1 May 2012 11:19:08 -0700 Thread-Topic: entropy label draft: reserved label for ELI Thread-Index: Ac0nxuZ7mKEo9ylARliGpi3k30uKHQ== Message-ID: <4E68B396-3D00-49D8-B5CE-3D7F2DF5EACF@juniper.net> References: <7ED7E703-9E0D-45DB-919B-854AB546B738@juniper.net> In-Reply-To: <7ED7E703-9E0D-45DB-919B-854AB546B738@juniper.net> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [mpls] entropy label draft: reserved label for ELI X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 May 2012 18:21:43 -0000 Hi All, Thanks very much for your responses! While I'll leave the final determination to the WG chairs, my reading of th= e responses to both of these questions was overwhelmingly positive, i.e., a= llocate a reserved label for ELI, and associate ELs with tunnels. Based on that, I'll update the draft to reflect these changes. ETA: May 8. Meanwhile, I hope the WG chairs chime in with their assessment of the respo= nses. Thanks again, Kireeti. On Apr 12, 2012, at 12:47 , Kireeti Kompella wrote: > Hi All, >=20 > Following up on the presentation at IETF 83, I promised to "take this to = the list". >=20 > The two questions are: > 1) should we make the ELI a "well-known" reserved label? > 2) should we associate the EL with tunnel labels or with application labe= ls? >=20 > This email is to poll the list about (1). >=20 > Making the ELI a reserved label has the following benefits: > a) Transit LSRs can hash on labels up to the ELI and one more (the EL), r= ather than processing all labels in the label stack. >=20 > b) Similar to (a), transit LSRs could use a Reserved ELI Label as a means= of bailing out early from grabbing "deeper" fields (e.g., IP headers withi= n Ethernet within ...) for hashing. >=20 > c) Transit LSRs, (particularly ones doing LDP/RSVP tunneling), can avoid = adding another entropy-label for the RSVP tunnel *if* the transit LSR finds= a reserved ELI already in the stack. Call this a 'short circuit' rule. >=20 > d) The short circuit rule can also be used for Carrier of Carrier VPNs an= d other situations with label hierarchy. >=20 > e) A reserved ELI obviates the need for upstream ELI allocation for mLDP = and P2MP RSVP-TE. >=20 > (Thanks to Shane for providing some of the above.) >=20 > The main drawback is the scarcity of reserved labels, which hopefully is = addressed by the pixie label draft. >=20 > So, the question is: should we make the ELI a reserved label? (If no, a = short reason would be helpful.) >=20 > Kireeti. >=20 From muly_i@rad.com Tue May 1 14:01:40 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9B6B21E80F6 for ; Tue, 1 May 2012 14:01:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.597 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.597 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tu0izBSYZb4O for ; Tue, 1 May 2012 14:01:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rad.co.il (mailrelay02.rad.co.il [62.0.23.237]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCBB421E8053 for ; Tue, 1 May 2012 14:01:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Internal Mail-Server by MailRelay02 (envelope-from muly?i@rad.com) with AES128-SHA encrypted SMTP; 1 May 2012 23:44:11 +0300 Received: from EXRAD5.ad.rad.co.il ([192.114.24.28]) by EXRAD5.ad.rad.co.il ([192.114.24.28]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Wed, 2 May 2012 00:01:08 +0300 From: Muly Ilan To: "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Question regarding draft-ietf-mpls-tp-mip-mep-map-01 Thread-Index: Ac0n3YS6BpNJSjkKRkqOFAx/HN2iEA== Date: Tue, 1 May 2012 21:01:07 +0000 Message-ID: <32CB7A1F0806AB4688CE3F22C29DAC87041E165A@EXRAD5.ad.rad.co.il> Accept-Language: en-AU, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [172.17.170.136] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_32CB7A1F0806AB4688CE3F22C29DAC87041E165AEXRAD5adradcoil_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Commtouch-Refid: str=0001.0A090201.4FA04F16.004B,ss=1,fgs=0 Subject: [mpls] Question regarding draft-ietf-mpls-tp-mip-mep-map-01 X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 May 2012 21:01:40 -0000 --_000_32CB7A1F0806AB4688CE3F22C29DAC87041E165AEXRAD5adradcoil_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear Authors, For the per-interface MIP model how do you suggest to perform a route traci= ng over a static MPLS-TP LSP? According to RFC6371 section 6.4 "Route tracing should always discover the = full list of MIPs and of peer MEPs". RFC6424 section 4 specifies a method for route tracing using LSP-Ping. It e= xplains to use MPLS TTL expiry to reach a specific node. Your solution to address a specific in-MIP or out-MIP is to include the MIP= identifier in the sent OAM packet. RFC6424 defines extensions to LSP-Ping,= in the form of new TLVs and sub-TLVs, that allow to identify the target MI= P within the node. However, for a static MPLS-TP LSP the MIP identifiers along the path are no= t known at the head-end prior to performing the route tracing and receiving= the LSP-Pings echo responses. Seems like a chicken and egg issue. I hope that there's a more elegant way than having the management plane con= figure all the relevant path identifiers at the head-end before attempting = a route trace. Regards, Muly Ilan --_000_32CB7A1F0806AB4688CE3F22C29DAC87041E165AEXRAD5adradcoil_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear Authors,=

 

For the per-interface MIP model= how do you suggest to perform a route tracing over a static MPLS-TP LSP?

 

A= ccording to RFC6371 section 6.4 “Route tracing should always d= iscover the full list of MIPs and of peer MEPs”.=

RFC6424 section 4 specifies a m= ethod for route tracing using LSP-Ping. It explains to use MPLS TTL expiry = to reach a specific node.

 

Your solution to address a spec= ific in-MIP or out-MIP is to include the MIP identifier in the sent OAM pac= ket. RFC6424 defines extensions to LSP-Ping, in the form of new TLVs and su= b-TLVs, that allow to identify the target MIP within the node.

However, for a static MPLS-TP L= SP the MIP identifiers along the path are not known at the head-end prior t= o performing the route tracing and receiving the LSP-Pings echo responses.<= o:p>

Seems like a chicken and egg is= sue.

 

I hope that there’s a mor= e elegant way than having the management plane configure all the relevant p= ath identifiers at the head-end before attempting a route trace.=

 

Regards,

 

Muly Ilan

--_000_32CB7A1F0806AB4688CE3F22C29DAC87041E165AEXRAD5adradcoil_-- From loa@pi.nu Wed May 2 00:37:29 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B73E11E8074 for ; Wed, 2 May 2012 00:37:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.569 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.569 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.030, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CUKzdKnwdEKz for ; Wed, 2 May 2012 00:37:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.pi.nu (mail.pi.nu [194.71.127.148]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F24011E807F for ; Wed, 2 May 2012 00:37:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.64] (81-236-221-144-no93.tbcn.telia.com [81.236.221.144]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by mail.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8681B2A8002; Wed, 2 May 2012 09:37:25 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4FA0E435.3060806@pi.nu> Date: Wed, 02 May 2012 09:37:25 +0200 From: Loa Andersson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120420 Thunderbird/12.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "mpls@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "mpls-ads@tools.ietf.org" , "mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label@tools.ietf.org" Subject: [mpls] wg chair read on using a reserved label as ELI X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 May 2012 07:37:29 -0000 Working Group, The MPLS wg chairs read on the discussion on allocating on of the reserved labels as ELI is that there are good support in the working group do to so. The new version of the document should therefore reflect this. Loa, George, Ross wg co-chairs -- Loa Andersson email: loa.andersson@ericsson.com Sr Strategy and Standards Manager loa@pi.nu Ericsson Inc phone: +46 10 717 52 13 +46 767 72 92 13 From liu.guoman@zte.com.cn Wed May 2 01:46:37 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C01FA21F87B9 for ; Wed, 2 May 2012 01:46:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -94.435 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-94.435 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_52=0.6, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RCVD_DOUBLE_IP_LOOSE=0.76, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id abPk5frI7qdM for ; Wed, 2 May 2012 01:46:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx5.zte.com.cn (mx6.zte.com.cn [95.130.199.165]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E27B121F87A8 for ; Wed, 2 May 2012 01:46:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.30.17.100] by mx5.zte.com.cn with surfront esmtp id 28620806486374; Wed, 2 May 2012 16:04:46 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.30.3.20] by [192.168.168.16] with StormMail ESMTP id 26449.806486374; Wed, 2 May 2012 16:46:02 +0800 (CST) Received: from notes_smtp.zte.com.cn ([10.30.1.239]) by mse01.zte.com.cn with ESMTP id q428jqtn009422 for ; Wed, 2 May 2012 16:45:52 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from liu.guoman@zte.com.cn) To: mpls@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5.4 March 27, 2005 Message-ID: From: liu.guoman@zte.com.cn Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 16:45:48 +0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on notes_smtp/zte_ltd(Release 8.5.1FP4|July 25, 2010) at 2012-05-02 16:45:53, Serialize complete at 2012-05-02 16:45:53 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 00303555482579F2_=" X-MAIL: mse01.zte.com.cn q428jqtn009422 Subject: Re: [mpls] New Version Notification for draft-liu-mpls-tp-interconnected-ring-protection-02.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 May 2012 08:46:37 -0000 This is a multipart message in MIME format. --=_alternative 00303555482579F2_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="GB2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 aGkuYWxsDQp0aGlzIGlzIG5ldyB2ZXJzaW9uIG9mIHRoaXMgZHJhZnQgYWNjb3JkaW5nIHRvIGFs bCBjb21tZW50cyBhbmQgcXVlc3Rpb25zIA0KLiB0aGUgcHJvdGVjdGlvbiBtYWlubHkgY29uc2lk ZXIgdGhlIHNwZWNpYWwgcHJvdGVjdGlvbiBzY2VuYXJpbyB3aGVyZQ0KaW50ZXJjb25uZWN0aW9u IGxpbmsgb3IgaW50ZXJjb25uZWN0IG5vZGUgaGFzIHRoZSBmYWlsdXJlLiBpZiBvbmx5IA0Kc2lu Z2xlLXJpbmcgcHJvdGVjdGlvbiBzb2x1dGlvbiBpcyB1c2VkLCBpdCBjYW4ndCByZWNvdmVyeSB0 aGUgZmFpbHVyZS4NCnNvIGl0IGlzIG5lY2Vzc2FyeSB0byBjb25zaWRlciB0aGUgcHJvdGVjdGlv biBzY2VuYXJpb3MgaW4gbXkgbWluZC4NCg0KaGVyZSB3ZWxjb21lIHRvIHlvdXIgY29tbWVudHMg YW5kIHN1Z2dlc3Rpb25zIGZvciB0aGlzIGRyYWZ0Lg0KdGhhbmsgeW91IQ0KDQpCLlIuDQpMaXUN Cg0KDQoNCg0KDQotLS0tLSDXqreiyMsgwfW5+sL6MTgwMzIzL3VzZXIvenRlX2x0ZCDKsbzkIDIw MTItMDUtMDIgMTY6MzkgLS0tLS0NCg0KaW50ZXJuZXQtZHJhZnRzQGlldGYub3JnIA0KMjAxMi0w NC0yNyAxNDo0NQ0KDQrK1bz+yMsNCmxpdS5ndW9tYW5AenRlLmNvbS5jbg0Ks63LzQ0Kd3lhYWNv dkBnbWFpbC5jb20NCtb3zOINCk5ldyBWZXJzaW9uIE5vdGlmaWNhdGlvbiBmb3IgDQpkcmFmdC1s aXUtbXBscy10cC1pbnRlcmNvbm5lY3RlZC1yaW5nLXByb3RlY3Rpb24tMDIudHh0DQoNCg0KDQoN Cg0KDQpBIG5ldyB2ZXJzaW9uIG9mIEktRCwgDQpkcmFmdC1saXUtbXBscy10cC1pbnRlcmNvbm5l Y3RlZC1yaW5nLXByb3RlY3Rpb24tMDIudHh0IGhhcyBiZWVuIA0Kc3VjY2Vzc2Z1bGx5IHN1Ym1p dHRlZCBieSBMaXUgR3VvbWFuIGFuZCBwb3N0ZWQgdG8gdGhlIElFVEYgcmVwb3NpdG9yeS4NCg0K RmlsZW5hbWU6ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBkcmFmdC1saXUtbXBscy10cC1pbnRlcmNvbm5lY3Rl ZC1yaW5nLXByb3RlY3Rpb24NClJldmlzaW9uOiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgMDINClRpdGxlOiAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBNUExTLVRQIHByb3RlY3Rpb24gZm9yIGludGVyY29u bmVjdGVkIA0KcmluZ3MNCkNyZWF0aW9uIGRhdGU6ICAgICAgICAgICAgMjAxMi0wNC0yNw0KV0cg SUQ6ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIEluZGl2aWR1YWwgU3VibWlzc2lvbg0KTnVt YmVyIG9mIHBhZ2VzOiAxMQ0KDQpBYnN0cmFjdDoNCiAgIEFjY29yZGluZyB0byB0aGUgcmluZyBw cm90ZWN0aW9uIFJlcXVpcmVtZW50cyBpbiBSRkMgNTY1NCwNCiAgIFJlcXVpcmVtZW50IDkzIDog V2hlbiBhIG5ldHdvcmsgaXMgY29uc3RydWN0ZWQgZnJvbSBpbnRlcmNvbm5lY3RlZA0KICAgcmlu Z3MsIE1QTFMtVFAgTVVTVCBzdXBwb3J0IHJlY292ZXJ5IG1lY2hhbmlzbXMgdGhhdCBwcm90ZWN0 IHVzZXINCiAgIGRhdGEgdGhhdCB0cmF2ZXJzZXMgbW9yZSB0aGFuIG9uZSByaW5nLiAgVGhpcyBp bmNsdWRlcyB0aGUNCiAgIHBvc3NpYmlsaXR5IG9mIGZhaWx1cmUgb2YgdGhlIHJpbmctaW50ZXJj b25uZWN0IG5vZGVzIGFuZCBsaW5rcyxzbw0KICAgdGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudCB3aWxsIGRlc2NyaWJs ZSBhbGwga2luZHMgb2YgaW50ZXJjb25uZWN0ZWQgcmluZw0KICAgU2NlbmFyaW9zIGFuZCBzZXZl cmFsIHByb3RlY3Rpb24gc29sdXRpb25zIGZvciByZWNvdmVyeSB0aGUgZmFpbHVyZQ0KICAgb2Yg dGhlIHJpbmctaW50ZXJjb25uZWN0IG5vZGVzIGFuZCBMaW5rcy4gLg0KDQoNCiAgIFRoaXMgZG9j dW1lbnQgaXMgYSBwcm9kdWN0IG9mIGEgam9pbnQgSW50ZXJuZXQgVGFzayBGb3JjZShJRVRGKSAv DQogICBJbnRlcm5hdGlvbmFsIFRlbGVjb21tdW5pY2F0aW9ucyBVbmlvbiBUZWxlY29tbXVuaWNh dGlvbnMNCiAgIFN0YW5kYXJkaXphdGlvbiBTZWN0b3IgKElUVS1UKSBlZmZvcnQgdG8gaW5jbHVk ZSBhbiBNUExTIFRyYW5zcG9ydA0KICAgUHJvZmlsZSB3aXRoaW4gdGhlIElFVEYgTVBMUyBhbmQg UFdFMyBhcmNoaXRlY3R1cmVzIHRvIHN1cHBvcnQgdGhlDQogICBjYXBhYmlsaXRpZXMgYW5kIGZ1 bmN0aW9uYWxpdGllcyBvZiBhIHBhY2tldCB0cmFuc3BvcnQgbmV0d29yayBhcw0KICAgZGVmaW5l ZCBieSB0aGUgSVRVLVQuDQoNCiAgDQoNCg0KVGhlIElFVEYgU2VjcmV0YXJpYXQNCg0KDQoNCg0K LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0N ClpURSBJbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBTZWN1cml0eSBOb3RpY2U6IFRoZSBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBjb250YWlu ZWQgaW4gdGhpcyBtYWlsIGlzIHNvbGVseSBwcm9wZXJ0eSBvZiB0aGUgc2VuZGVyJ3Mgb3JnYW5p emF0aW9uLiBUaGlzIG1haWwgY29tbXVuaWNhdGlvbiBpcyBjb25maWRlbnRpYWwuIFJlY2lwaWVu dHMgbmFtZWQgYWJvdmUgYXJlIG9ibGlnYXRlZCB0byBtYWludGFpbiBzZWNyZWN5IGFuZCBhcmUg bm90IHBlcm1pdHRlZCB0byBkaXNjbG9zZSB0aGUgY29udGVudHMgb2YgdGhpcyBjb21tdW5pY2F0 aW9uIHRvIG90aGVycy4NClRoaXMgZW1haWwgYW5kIGFueSBmaWxlcyB0cmFuc21pdHRlZCB3aXRo IGl0IGFyZSBjb25maWRlbnRpYWwgYW5kIGludGVuZGVkIHNvbGVseSBmb3IgdGhlIHVzZSBvZiB0 aGUgaW5kaXZpZHVhbCBvciBlbnRpdHkgdG8gd2hvbSB0aGV5IGFyZSBhZGRyZXNzZWQuIElmIHlv dSBoYXZlIHJlY2VpdmVkIHRoaXMgZW1haWwgaW4gZXJyb3IgcGxlYXNlIG5vdGlmeSB0aGUgb3Jp Z2luYXRvciBvZiB0aGUgbWVzc2FnZS4gQW55IHZpZXdzIGV4cHJlc3NlZCBpbiB0aGlzIG1lc3Nh Z2UgYXJlIHRob3NlIG9mIHRoZSBpbmRpdmlkdWFsIHNlbmRlci4NClRoaXMgbWVzc2FnZSBoYXMg YmVlbiBzY2FubmVkIGZvciB2aXJ1c2VzIGFuZCBTcGFtIGJ5IFpURSBBbnRpLVNwYW0gc3lzdGVt Lg0K --=_alternative 00303555482579F2_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="GB2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 DQo8YnI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0yIGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPmhpLmFsbDwvZm9udD4NCjxicj48 Zm9udCBzaXplPTIgZmFjZT0ic2Fucy1zZXJpZiI+dGhpcyBpcyBuZXcgdmVyc2lvbiBvZiB0aGlz IGRyYWZ0IGFjY29yZGluZw0KdG8gYWxsIGNvbW1lbnRzIGFuZCBxdWVzdGlvbnMgLiB0aGUgcHJv dGVjdGlvbiBtYWlubHkgY29uc2lkZXIgdGhlIHNwZWNpYWwNCnByb3RlY3Rpb24gc2NlbmFyaW8g d2hlcmU8L2ZvbnQ+DQo8YnI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0yIGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPmludGVyY29u bmVjdGlvbiBsaW5rIG9yIGludGVyY29ubmVjdA0Kbm9kZSBoYXMgdGhlIGZhaWx1cmUuIGlmIG9u bHkgc2luZ2xlLXJpbmcgcHJvdGVjdGlvbiBzb2x1dGlvbiBpcyB1c2VkLA0KaXQgY2FuJ3QgcmVj b3ZlcnkgdGhlIGZhaWx1cmUuPC9mb250Pg0KPGJyPjxmb250IHNpemU9MiBmYWNlPSJzYW5zLXNl cmlmIj5zbyBpdCBpcyBuZWNlc3NhcnkgdG8gY29uc2lkZXIgdGhlIHByb3RlY3Rpb24NCnNjZW5h cmlvcyBpbiBteSBtaW5kLjwvZm9udD4NCjxicj4NCjxicj48Zm9udCBzaXplPTIgZmFjZT0ic2Fu cy1zZXJpZiI+aGVyZSB3ZWxjb21lIHRvIHlvdXIgY29tbWVudHMgYW5kIHN1Z2dlc3Rpb25zDQpm b3IgdGhpcyBkcmFmdC48L2ZvbnQ+DQo8YnI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0yIGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2VyaWYi PnRoYW5rIHlvdSE8L2ZvbnQ+DQo8YnI+DQo8YnI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0yIGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2Vy aWYiPkIuUi48L2ZvbnQ+DQo8YnI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0yIGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPkxpdTwv Zm9udD4NCjxicj48Zm9udCBzaXplPTIgZmFjZT0ic2Fucy1zZXJpZiI+PGJyPg0KPC9mb250Pg0K PHRhYmxlPg0KPHRyPg0KPHRkPg0KPGRpdiBhbGlnbj1jZW50ZXI+PC9kaXY+DQo8dGQ+PC90YWJs ZT4NCjxicj4NCjxicj48Zm9udCBzaXplPTEgY29sb3I9IzgwMDA4MCBmYWNlPSJzYW5zLXNlcmlm Ij4tLS0tLSDXqreiyMsgwfW5+sL6MTgwMzIzL3VzZXIvenRlX2x0ZA0KyrG85CAyMDEyLTA1LTAy IDE2OjM5IC0tLS0tPC9mb250Pg0KPGJyPg0KPHRhYmxlIHdpZHRoPTEwMCU+DQo8dHIgdmFsaWdu PXRvcD4NCjx0ZCB3aWR0aD0zNiU+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0xIGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPjxiPmlu dGVybmV0LWRyYWZ0c0BpZXRmLm9yZzwvYj4NCjwvZm9udD4NCjxwPjxmb250IHNpemU9MSBmYWNl PSJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIj4yMDEyLTA0LTI3IDE0OjQ1PC9mb250Pg0KPHRkIHdpZHRoPTYzJT4NCjx0 YWJsZSB3aWR0aD0xMDAlPg0KPHRyIHZhbGlnbj10b3A+DQo8dGQ+DQo8ZGl2IGFsaWduPXJpZ2h0 Pjxmb250IHNpemU9MSBmYWNlPSJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIj7K1bz+yMs8L2ZvbnQ+PC9kaXY+DQo8dGQ+ PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0xIGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPmxpdS5ndW9tYW5AenRlLmNvbS5jbjwvZm9u dD4NCjx0ciB2YWxpZ249dG9wPg0KPHRkPg0KPGRpdiBhbGlnbj1yaWdodD48Zm9udCBzaXplPTEg ZmFjZT0ic2Fucy1zZXJpZiI+s63LzTwvZm9udD48L2Rpdj4NCjx0ZD48Zm9udCBzaXplPTEgZmFj ZT0ic2Fucy1zZXJpZiI+d3lhYWNvdkBnbWFpbC5jb208L2ZvbnQ+DQo8dHIgdmFsaWduPXRvcD4N Cjx0ZD4NCjxkaXYgYWxpZ249cmlnaHQ+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0xIGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPtb3 zOI8L2ZvbnQ+PC9kaXY+DQo8dGQ+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0xIGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPk5ldyBW ZXJzaW9uIE5vdGlmaWNhdGlvbiBmb3IgJm5ic3A7DQombmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwO2RyYWZ0 LWxpdS1tcGxzLXRwLWludGVyY29ubmVjdGVkLXJpbmctcHJvdGVjdGlvbi0wMi50eHQ8L2ZvbnQ+ PC90YWJsZT4NCjxicj4NCjx0YWJsZT4NCjx0ciB2YWxpZ249dG9wPg0KPHRkPg0KPHRkPjwvdGFi bGU+DQo8YnI+PC90YWJsZT4NCjxicj4NCjxicj4NCjxicj48Zm9udCBzaXplPTI+PHR0PkEgbmV3 IHZlcnNpb24gb2YgSS1ELCBkcmFmdC1saXUtbXBscy10cC1pbnRlcmNvbm5lY3RlZC1yaW5nLXBy b3RlY3Rpb24tMDIudHh0DQpoYXMgYmVlbiBzdWNjZXNzZnVsbHkgc3VibWl0dGVkIGJ5IExpdSBH dW9tYW4gYW5kIHBvc3RlZCB0byB0aGUgSUVURiByZXBvc2l0b3J5Ljxicj4NCjxicj4NCkZpbGVu YW1lOiAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5i c3A7DQombmJzcDtkcmFmdC1saXUtbXBscy10cC1pbnRlcmNvbm5lY3RlZC1yaW5nLXByb3RlY3Rp b248YnI+DQpSZXZpc2lvbjogJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJz cDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOw0KJm5ic3A7MDI8YnI+DQpUaXRsZTogJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJz cDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOw0KJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJz cDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsNCk1QTFMtVFAgcHJv dGVjdGlvbiBmb3IgaW50ZXJjb25uZWN0ZWQgcmluZ3M8YnI+DQpDcmVhdGlvbiBkYXRlOiAmbmJz cDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsNCiZuYnNwOyAmbmJz cDsyMDEyLTA0LTI3PGJyPg0KV0cgSUQ6ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJz cDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsNCiZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJz cDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7DQpJbmRpdmlkdWFsIFN1Ym1pc3Npb248YnI+ DQpOdW1iZXIgb2YgcGFnZXM6IDExPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KQWJzdHJhY3Q6PGJyPg0KICZuYnNwOyBB Y2NvcmRpbmcgdG8gdGhlIHJpbmcgcHJvdGVjdGlvbiBSZXF1aXJlbWVudHMgaW4gUkZDIDU2NTQs PGJyPg0KICZuYnNwOyBSZXF1aXJlbWVudCA5MyA6IFdoZW4gYSBuZXR3b3JrIGlzIGNvbnN0cnVj dGVkIGZyb20gaW50ZXJjb25uZWN0ZWQ8YnI+DQogJm5ic3A7IHJpbmdzLCBNUExTLVRQIE1VU1Qg c3VwcG9ydCByZWNvdmVyeSBtZWNoYW5pc21zIHRoYXQgcHJvdGVjdCB1c2VyPGJyPg0KICZuYnNw OyBkYXRhIHRoYXQgdHJhdmVyc2VzIG1vcmUgdGhhbiBvbmUgcmluZy4gJm5ic3A7VGhpcyBpbmNs dWRlcyB0aGU8YnI+DQogJm5ic3A7IHBvc3NpYmlsaXR5IG9mIGZhaWx1cmUgb2YgdGhlIHJpbmct aW50ZXJjb25uZWN0IG5vZGVzIGFuZCBsaW5rcyxzbzxicj4NCiAmbmJzcDsgdGhpcyBkb2N1bWVu dCB3aWxsIGRlc2NyaWJsZSBhbGwga2luZHMgb2YgaW50ZXJjb25uZWN0ZWQgcmluZzxicj4NCiAm bmJzcDsgU2NlbmFyaW9zIGFuZCBzZXZlcmFsIHByb3RlY3Rpb24gc29sdXRpb25zIGZvciByZWNv dmVyeSB0aGUgZmFpbHVyZTxicj4NCiAmbmJzcDsgb2YgdGhlIHJpbmctaW50ZXJjb25uZWN0IG5v ZGVzIGFuZCBMaW5rcy4gLjxicj4NCjxicj4NCjxicj4NCiAmbmJzcDsgVGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudCBp cyBhIHByb2R1Y3Qgb2YgYSBqb2ludCBJbnRlcm5ldCBUYXNrIEZvcmNlKElFVEYpDQovPGJyPg0K ICZuYnNwOyBJbnRlcm5hdGlvbmFsIFRlbGVjb21tdW5pY2F0aW9ucyBVbmlvbiBUZWxlY29tbXVu aWNhdGlvbnM8YnI+DQogJm5ic3A7IFN0YW5kYXJkaXphdGlvbiBTZWN0b3IgKElUVS1UKSBlZmZv cnQgdG8gaW5jbHVkZSBhbiBNUExTIFRyYW5zcG9ydDxicj4NCiAmbmJzcDsgUHJvZmlsZSB3aXRo aW4gdGhlIElFVEYgTVBMUyBhbmQgUFdFMyBhcmNoaXRlY3R1cmVzIHRvIHN1cHBvcnQNCnRoZTxi cj4NCiAmbmJzcDsgY2FwYWJpbGl0aWVzIGFuZCBmdW5jdGlvbmFsaXRpZXMgb2YgYSBwYWNrZXQg dHJhbnNwb3J0IG5ldHdvcmsNCmFzPGJyPg0KICZuYnNwOyBkZWZpbmVkIGJ5IHRoZSBJVFUtVC48 YnI+DQo8YnI+DQogJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5i c3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7DQombmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5i c3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7DQombmJzcDsgJm5i c3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJz cDsgJm5ic3A7DQombmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJz cDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOzxicj4NCjxicj4NCjxicj4NClRoZSBJRVRGIFNlY3JldGFyaWF0PGJy Pg0KPGJyPg0KPC90dD48L2ZvbnQ+DQo8YnI+PHByZT4NCi0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tDQpaVEUmbmJzcDtJbmZvcm1hdGlvbiZu YnNwO1NlY3VyaXR5Jm5ic3A7Tm90aWNlOiZuYnNwO1RoZSZuYnNwO2luZm9ybWF0aW9uJm5ic3A7 Y29udGFpbmVkJm5ic3A7aW4mbmJzcDt0aGlzJm5ic3A7bWFpbCZuYnNwO2lzJm5ic3A7c29sZWx5 Jm5ic3A7cHJvcGVydHkmbmJzcDtvZiZuYnNwO3RoZSZuYnNwO3NlbmRlcidzJm5ic3A7b3JnYW5p emF0aW9uLiZuYnNwO1RoaXMmbmJzcDttYWlsJm5ic3A7Y29tbXVuaWNhdGlvbiZuYnNwO2lzJm5i c3A7Y29uZmlkZW50aWFsLiZuYnNwO1JlY2lwaWVudHMmbmJzcDtuYW1lZCZuYnNwO2Fib3ZlJm5i c3A7YXJlJm5ic3A7b2JsaWdhdGVkJm5ic3A7dG8mbmJzcDttYWludGFpbiZuYnNwO3NlY3JlY3km bmJzcDthbmQmbmJzcDthcmUmbmJzcDtub3QmbmJzcDtwZXJtaXR0ZWQmbmJzcDt0byZuYnNwO2Rp c2Nsb3NlJm5ic3A7dGhlJm5ic3A7Y29udGVudHMmbmJzcDtvZiZuYnNwO3RoaXMmbmJzcDtjb21t dW5pY2F0aW9uJm5ic3A7dG8mbmJzcDtvdGhlcnMuDQpUaGlzJm5ic3A7ZW1haWwmbmJzcDthbmQm bmJzcDthbnkmbmJzcDtmaWxlcyZuYnNwO3RyYW5zbWl0dGVkJm5ic3A7d2l0aCZuYnNwO2l0Jm5i c3A7YXJlJm5ic3A7Y29uZmlkZW50aWFsJm5ic3A7YW5kJm5ic3A7aW50ZW5kZWQmbmJzcDtzb2xl bHkmbmJzcDtmb3ImbmJzcDt0aGUmbmJzcDt1c2UmbmJzcDtvZiZuYnNwO3RoZSZuYnNwO2luZGl2 aWR1YWwmbmJzcDtvciZuYnNwO2VudGl0eSZuYnNwO3RvJm5ic3A7d2hvbSZuYnNwO3RoZXkmbmJz cDthcmUmbmJzcDthZGRyZXNzZWQuJm5ic3A7SWYmbmJzcDt5b3UmbmJzcDtoYXZlJm5ic3A7cmVj ZWl2ZWQmbmJzcDt0aGlzJm5ic3A7ZW1haWwmbmJzcDtpbiZuYnNwO2Vycm9yJm5ic3A7cGxlYXNl Jm5ic3A7bm90aWZ5Jm5ic3A7dGhlJm5ic3A7b3JpZ2luYXRvciZuYnNwO29mJm5ic3A7dGhlJm5i c3A7bWVzc2FnZS4mbmJzcDtBbnkmbmJzcDt2aWV3cyZuYnNwO2V4cHJlc3NlZCZuYnNwO2luJm5i c3A7dGhpcyZuYnNwO21lc3NhZ2UmbmJzcDthcmUmbmJzcDt0aG9zZSZuYnNwO29mJm5ic3A7dGhl Jm5ic3A7aW5kaXZpZHVhbCZuYnNwO3NlbmRlci4NClRoaXMmbmJzcDttZXNzYWdlJm5ic3A7aGFz Jm5ic3A7YmVlbiZuYnNwO3NjYW5uZWQmbmJzcDtmb3ImbmJzcDt2aXJ1c2VzJm5ic3A7YW5kJm5i c3A7U3BhbSZuYnNwO2J5Jm5ic3A7WlRFJm5ic3A7QW50aS1TcGFtJm5ic3A7c3lzdGVtLg0KPC9w cmU+ --=_alternative 00303555482579F2_=-- From adrian@olddog.co.uk Wed May 2 03:19:57 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 706EE11E8085 for ; Wed, 2 May 2012 03:19:57 -0700 (PDT) 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=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GKsB-GKFCg9p for ; Wed, 2 May 2012 03:19:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp4.iomartmail.com (asmtp4.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.175]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C7F711E8083 for ; Wed, 2 May 2012 03:19:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp4.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp4.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q42AJsrf016526; Wed, 2 May 2012 11:19:54 +0100 Received: from 950129200 ([149.254.187.205]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp4.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q42AJqP5016490 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 2 May 2012 11:19:53 +0100 From: "Adrian Farrel" To: "'Kireeti Kompella'" , References: <7ED7E703-9E0D-45DB-919B-854AB546B738@juniper.net> <4E68B396-3D00-49D8-B5CE-3D7F2DF5EACF@juniper.net> In-Reply-To: <4E68B396-3D00-49D8-B5CE-3D7F2DF5EACF@juniper.net> Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 11:19:52 +0100 Message-ID: <01d501cd284d$1d9fd7e0$58df87a0$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQJlujSfFFXwO1YlwU37NkvCRLfLzQDpvyHclX3XwzA= Content-Language: en-gb Subject: Re: [mpls] entropy label draft: reserved label for ELI X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 May 2012 10:19:57 -0000 > Based on that, I'll update the draft to reflect these changes. ETA: May 8. 2012 ? From mustapha.aissaoui@alcatel-lucent.com Wed May 2 08:35:56 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88EB121E801E for ; Wed, 2 May 2012 08:35:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -7.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Xcyh-ahIMNjg for ; Wed, 2 May 2012 08:35:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ihemail3.lucent.com (ihemail3.lucent.com [135.245.0.37]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A03A221E8019 for ; Wed, 2 May 2012 08:35:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from usnavsmail1.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com (usnavsmail1.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com [135.3.39.9]) by ihemail3.lucent.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id q42FZpVh027198 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Wed, 2 May 2012 10:35:51 -0500 (CDT) Received: from USNAVSXCHHUB01.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com (usnavsxchhub01.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com [135.3.39.110]) by usnavsmail1.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/GMO) with ESMTP id q42FZU9v001347 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 2 May 2012 10:35:51 -0500 Received: from USNAVSXCHMBSC2.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.3.39.144]) by USNAVSXCHHUB01.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.3.39.110]) with mapi; Wed, 2 May 2012 10:35:45 -0500 From: "Aissaoui, Mustapha (Mustapha)" To: "mpls@ietf.org" Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 10:35:43 -0500 Thread-Topic: Error in RFC 6425 - "Detecting Data-Plane Failures in Point-to-Multipoint MPLS - Extensions to LSP Ping" Thread-Index: Ac0oeTynIa0xRbTxTVy+PunDUts7Ww== Message-ID: <5DF53972F7E9134782DCE51624466FE50BD6877C68@USNAVSXCHMBSC2.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 135.245.2.37 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.64 on 135.3.39.9 Subject: [mpls] Error in RFC 6425 - "Detecting Data-Plane Failures in Point-to-Multipoint MPLS - Extensions to LSP Ping" X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 May 2012 15:35:56 -0000 Dear authors of RFC 6425, I believe the length of the "RSVP P2MP IPv6 Session Sub-TLV" in Section 3.1= .1 should be 44 bytes and not 56 bytes to match the format shown in Section= 3.1.1.2.=20 It may be the 56 byte figure was copied over from RFC 4379 which uses a 16-= byte "IPv6 tunnel end point address" as the top field in the sub-TLV in the= case of an IPv6 P2P RSVP session. With an IPv6 P2MP RSVP session that fiel= d is replaced with the P2MP-ID which is a 4-byte field only. Mustapha.= From adrian@olddog.co.uk Thu May 3 03:46:08 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4CD521F8464 for ; Thu, 3 May 2012 03:46:08 -0700 (PDT) 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=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4HciqOz6Vp3q for ; Thu, 3 May 2012 03:46:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp3.iomartmail.com (asmtp3.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.159]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB26321F845E for ; Thu, 3 May 2012 03:46:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp3.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp3.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q43Ak0bW023583; Thu, 3 May 2012 11:46:01 +0100 Received: from 950129200 (173-167-193-1-ip-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.167.193.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp3.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q43AjuYP023369 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 3 May 2012 11:45:58 +0100 From: "Adrian Farrel" To: "'Aissaoui, Mustapha \(Mustapha\)'" , References: <5DF53972F7E9134782DCE51624466FE50BD6877C68@USNAVSXCHMBSC2.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: <5DF53972F7E9134782DCE51624466FE50BD6877C68@USNAVSXCHMBSC2.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com> Date: Thu, 3 May 2012 11:45:34 +0100 Message-ID: <050a01cd2919$ed0ce960$c726bc20$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQKNo/TyDd1GvMN2yA2ol224GFNL/5U261CQ Content-Language: en-gb Subject: Re: [mpls] Error in RFC 6425 - "Detecting Data-Plane Failures in Point-to-Multipoint MPLS - Extensions to LSP Ping" X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 May 2012 10:46:08 -0000 Hi Mustapha, You're right. The I-D (up until quite late) had the IPv6 P2MP ID as 128 bit. That got fixed but the byte count was missed. Would you care to raise the Erratum? A > -----Original Message----- > From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of > Aissaoui, Mustapha (Mustapha) > Sent: 02 May 2012 16:36 > To: mpls@ietf.org > Subject: [mpls] Error in RFC 6425 - "Detecting Data-Plane Failures in Point-to- > Multipoint MPLS - Extensions to LSP Ping" > > Dear authors of RFC 6425, > I believe the length of the "RSVP P2MP IPv6 Session Sub-TLV" in Section 3.1.1 > should be 44 bytes and not 56 bytes to match the format shown in Section > 3.1.1.2. > > It may be the 56 byte figure was copied over from RFC 4379 which uses a 16-byte > "IPv6 tunnel end point address" as the top field in the sub-TLV in the case of an > IPv6 P2P RSVP session. With an IPv6 P2MP RSVP session that field is replaced with > the P2MP-ID which is a 4-byte field only. > > Mustapha. > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From loa@pi.nu Fri May 4 00:19:09 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 049B821F86A5 for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 00:19:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.572 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.572 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.027, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ltt7FJZiQ5ZC for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 00:19:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.pi.nu (mail.pi.nu [194.71.127.148]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6599E21F860D for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 00:19:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.64] (81-236-221-144-no93.tbcn.telia.com [81.236.221.144]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by mail.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5F01E2A8002; Fri, 4 May 2012 09:19:05 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4FA382EA.7020401@pi.nu> Date: Fri, 04 May 2012 09:19:06 +0200 From: Loa Andersson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "mpls@ietf.org" , draft-ietf-mpls-tp-te-mib@tools.ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org" Subject: [mpls] IPR's on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-te-mib X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 May 2012 07:19:09 -0000 Working Group, The wg chairs prepares - draft-ietf-mpls-tp-te-mib for WG last call. Before the wg last, we would like to check whether there is IPR on the documents that needs to be disclosed. Are you aware of any IPR that applies to the two drafts? If so, has this IPR 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 regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. The documents will not advance to the next stage until a response has been received from each author and contributor. If you are on the MPLS WG email list but 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. If you are aware of IPR's please respond to this mail before May 18th. Thanks, Loa (as MPLS WG co-chair) -- Loa Andersson email: loa.andersson@ericsson.com Sr Strategy and Standards Manager loa@pi.nu Ericsson Inc phone: +46 10 717 52 13 +46 767 72 92 13 From tnadeau@juniper.net Fri May 4 04:46:08 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A51FC21F85C0 for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 04:46:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id C9VP8zf04fIg for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 04:46:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from exprod7og119.obsmtp.com (exprod7og119.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.16]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 056A021F84E2 for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 04:46:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from P-EMHUB01-HQ.jnpr.net ([66.129.224.36]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob119.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKT6PBdRqpKbvHfykjyu8VKU8QBHj2jgS2@postini.com; Fri, 04 May 2012 04:46:08 PDT Received: from p-emfe02-wf.jnpr.net (172.28.145.25) by P-EMHUB01-HQ.jnpr.net (172.24.192.35) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.213.0; Fri, 4 May 2012 04:43:44 -0700 Received: from EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net ([fe80::1914:3299:33d9:e43b]) by p-emfe02-wf.jnpr.net ([fe80::c126:c633:d2dc:8090%11]) with mapi; Fri, 4 May 2012 07:43:44 -0400 From: Thomas Nadeau To: Loa Andersson , "mpls@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-mpls-tp-te-mib@tools.ietf.org" Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 07:43:41 -0400 Thread-Topic: IPR's on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-te-mib Thread-Index: Ac0p6yhNEPyanUArSfem5CLGLAGEGg== Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <4FA382EA.7020401@pi.nu> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.0.120402 acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] IPR's on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-te-mib X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 May 2012 11:49:22 -0000 None from my end. On 5/4/12 3:19 AM, "Loa Andersson" wrote: >Working Group, > > >The wg chairs prepares > >- draft-ietf-mpls-tp-te-mib > >for WG last call. > >Before the wg last, we would like to check whether >there is IPR on the documents that needs to be disclosed. > >Are you aware of any IPR that applies to the two drafts? >If so, has this IPR 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 regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant >IPR. The documents will not advance to the next stage until a response >has been received from each author and contributor. > >If you are on the MPLS WG email list but 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. >If you are aware of IPR's please respond to this mail before May 18th. > >Thanks, Loa > >(as MPLS WG co-chair) >--=20 > > >Loa Andersson email: loa.andersson@ericsson.com >Sr Strategy and Standards Manager loa@pi.nu >Ericsson Inc phone: +46 10 717 52 13 > +46 767 72 92 13 From Kannan.Sampath@aricent.com Fri May 4 05:20:43 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A02A921F860D for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 05:20:43 -0700 (PDT) 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=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 968zMCBi+quW for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 05:20:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jaguar.aricent.com (jaguar.aricent.com [180.151.2.24]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DBA321F8609 for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 05:20:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jaguar.aricent.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by postfix.imss71 (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FCB836B5B; Fri, 4 May 2012 17:48:18 +0530 (IST) Received: from GUREXHT02.ASIAN.AD.ARICENT.COM (gurexht02.asian.ad.aricent.com [10.203.171.138]) by jaguar.aricent.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 292D636B53; Fri, 4 May 2012 17:48:18 +0530 (IST) Received: from GUREXMB02.ASIAN.AD.ARICENT.COM ([10.203.171.134]) by GUREXHT02.ASIAN.AD.ARICENT.COM ([10.203.171.138]) with mapi; Fri, 4 May 2012 17:50:27 +0530 From: Kannan KV Sampath To: "'tnadeau@juniper.net'" , "'loa@pi.nu'" , "'mpls@ietf.org'" , "'draft-ietf-mpls-tp-te-mib@tools.ietf.org'" Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 17:50:26 +0530 Thread-Topic: IPR's on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-te-mib Thread-Index: Ac0p6yhNEPyanUArSfem5CLGLAGEGgABSF4p Message-ID: <04EDFA4923CA7849A51A812953FF873602C4DE480C@GUREXMB02.ASIAN.AD.ARICENT.COM> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "'mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org'" Subject: Re: [mpls] IPR's on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-te-mib X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 May 2012 12:20:43 -0000 None from my end as well. ----- Original Message ----- From: Thomas Nadeau [mailto:tnadeau@juniper.net] Sent: Friday, May 04, 2012 05:13 PM To: Loa Andersson ; mpls@ietf.org ; draft-ietf-mp= ls-tp-te-mib@tools.ietf.org Cc: mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: IPR's on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-te-mib None from my end. On 5/4/12 3:19 AM, "Loa Andersson" wrote: >Working Group, > > >The wg chairs prepares > >- draft-ietf-mpls-tp-te-mib > >for WG last call. > >Before the wg last, we would like to check whether >there is IPR on the documents that needs to be disclosed. > >Are you aware of any IPR that applies to the two drafts? >If so, has this IPR 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 regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant >IPR. The documents will not advance to the next stage until a response >has been received from each author and contributor. > >If you are on the MPLS WG email list but 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. >If you are aware of IPR's please respond to this mail before May 18th. > >Thanks, Loa > >(as MPLS WG co-chair) >-- > > >Loa Andersson email: loa.andersson@ericsson.com >Sr Strategy and Standards Manager loa@pi.nu >Ericsson Inc phone: +46 10 717 52 13 > +46 767 72 92 13 =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D Please refer to http://www.aricent.com/legal/email_disclaimer.html for important disclosures regarding this electronic communication. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D From aldrin.ietf@gmail.com Fri May 4 07:37:08 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAB9A21F8624 for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 07:37:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.935 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.935 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.732, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OyiIUV+lLYmj for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 07:37:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pz0-f52.google.com (mail-pz0-f52.google.com [209.85.210.52]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C754F21F85B9 for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 07:37:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by dadz9 with SMTP id z9so4589320dad.39 for ; Fri, 04 May 2012 07:37:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:message-id:cc:x-mailer:from:subject:date:to; bh=pIOx2qmNW0FPQH1A1L4+UdBGYwdNbiUrPVTaA1Ic1kg=; b=xeqgxmK6+Id5ew96Y1xWaWbOn9CUdPRly0DyXCNItpJxrM15+gK7cot/8TuR2CzExk EuZLrqKrGp4obu31lETJmBxxVgiOabNU1zQg0Yjjaw3kgcrc9nDnspebZ7d5fNfM8n6I UXSlH+Biy9nTv6t7uz0M/mXv7thX51bsYBjpKMp7xSflAy86M3DYxYCZaFVA59P4019c ChxCpVC9F0/hzMGjsLjqklING12nV2//8wnHs0WeNk1vTiYNv5DGlAK+uqgykWEY/Rc2 pv3z22G6wrgbyeeLtad1it/3+qpau2NmOkGQnFv2N0fKkEh+FqeHGQ+miUMVLHFMmotd DSVw== Received: by 10.68.213.234 with SMTP id nv10mr5646455pbc.36.1336142227430; Fri, 04 May 2012 07:37:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.5] (c-107-3-156-34.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [107.3.156.34]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id py9sm1703770pbb.35.2012.05.04.07.37.05 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 04 May 2012 07:37:06 -0700 (PDT) References: <04EDFA4923CA7849A51A812953FF873602C4DE480C@GUREXMB02.ASIAN.AD.ARICENT.COM> In-Reply-To: <04EDFA4923CA7849A51A812953FF873602C4DE480C@GUREXMB02.ASIAN.AD.ARICENT.COM> Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Message-Id: <37BB7829-8A47-44C3-9357-6D93AC05963A@gmail.com> X-Mailer: iPad Mail (9B176) From: Sam Aldrin Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 07:37:04 -0700 To: Kannan KV Sampath Cc: "tnadeau@juniper.net" , "mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org" , "mpls@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-mpls-tp-te-mib@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] IPR's on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-te-mib X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 May 2012 14:37:08 -0000 None from my end. Thanks Sam Sent from my iPad On May 4, 2012, at 5:20 AM, Kannan KV Sampath w= rote: > None from my end as well. >=20 >=20 > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Thomas Nadeau [mailto:tnadeau@juniper.net] > Sent: Friday, May 04, 2012 05:13 PM > To: Loa Andersson ; mpls@ietf.org ; draft-ietf-m= pls-tp-te-mib@tools.ietf.org > Cc: mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org > Subject: Re: IPR's on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-te-mib >=20 > None from my end. >=20 > On 5/4/12 3:19 AM, "Loa Andersson" wrote: >=20 >> Working Group, >>=20 >>=20 >> The wg chairs prepares >>=20 >> - draft-ietf-mpls-tp-te-mib >>=20 >> for WG last call. >>=20 >> Before the wg last, we would like to check whether >> there is IPR on the documents that needs to be disclosed. >>=20 >> Are you aware of any IPR that applies to the two drafts? >> If so, has this IPR 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 please respond to >> this email regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant >> IPR. The documents will not advance to the next stage until a response >> has been received from each author and contributor. >>=20 >> If you are on the MPLS WG email list but 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. >> If you are aware of IPR's please respond to this mail before May 18th. >>=20 >> Thanks, Loa >>=20 >> (as MPLS WG co-chair) >> -- >>=20 >>=20 >> Loa Andersson email: loa.andersson@ericsson.com >> Sr Strategy and Standards Manager loa@pi.nu >> Ericsson Inc phone: +46 10 717 52 13 >> +46 767 72 92 13 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D > Please refer to http://www.aricent.com/legal/email_disclaimer.html > for important disclosures regarding this electronic communication. > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From venkat.mahalingams@gmail.com Fri May 4 09:25:08 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99B7321E803D for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 09:25:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.001, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Kx9jLg9G3ChA for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 09:25:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vb0-f44.google.com (mail-vb0-f44.google.com [209.85.212.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD47521E803C for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 09:25:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by vbbez10 with SMTP id ez10so2580689vbb.31 for ; Fri, 04 May 2012 09:25:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=yQZjbJIK7uOJ3q3SN768yEVJ5LIE5AgW/1jU9+pVb5g=; b=joFGWXiH7dP9oE7weC17KnFrvgiMCfM26ef1M7xCpqAaBpzX/IIj4Vc74bjaQLYsxn f2fNOrNf16DeXPdohKmdZjEBDFjgua4nFfGRBCeeKdzMOl74jsTi2GnYpXzwYX4bvUhJ T/NCoQx/jD72qwVMHGLrlfELjOQjSIoQpbZHgOW0Edtgr5hqJ7/FRVF3Zw4JBQaSuBya 1BurQnsDURqYKRaDbKnPgbspwFFakquPTGMYDen06SyPVoB97t+nSSSBMjBUIw0wTvHO TIVfwNFrO77uLYuBXf3zb53dv2xacR7Rt48vep9FAaOkSh535wn/ygrMh/q7khlPuJ6E m6jA== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.24.129 with SMTP id u1mr3369465vdf.77.1336148260095; Fri, 04 May 2012 09:17:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.212.193 with HTTP; Fri, 4 May 2012 09:17:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <37BB7829-8A47-44C3-9357-6D93AC05963A@gmail.com> References: <04EDFA4923CA7849A51A812953FF873602C4DE480C@GUREXMB02.ASIAN.AD.ARICENT.COM> <37BB7829-8A47-44C3-9357-6D93AC05963A@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 09:17:39 -0700 Message-ID: From: Venkatesan Mahalingam To: Sam Aldrin , Kannan KV Sampath , "tnadeau@juniper.net" , "loa@pi.nu" , "mpls@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-mpls-tp-te-mib@tools.ietf.org" , "mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [mpls] IPR's on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-te-mib X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 May 2012 16:25:08 -0000 None from my end. Thanks, Venkat. On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 7:37 AM, Sam Aldrin wrote: > None from my end. > > Thanks > Sam > > Sent from my iPad > > On May 4, 2012, at 5:20 AM, Kannan KV Sampath wrote: > >> None from my end as well. >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Thomas Nadeau [mailto:tnadeau@juniper.net] >> Sent: Friday, May 04, 2012 05:13 PM >> To: Loa Andersson ; mpls@ietf.org ; draft-ietf= -mpls-tp-te-mib@tools.ietf.org >> Cc: mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org >> Subject: Re: IPR's on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-te-mib >> >> None from my end. >> >> On 5/4/12 3:19 AM, "Loa Andersson" wrote: >> >>> Working Group, >>> >>> >>> The wg chairs prepares >>> >>> - draft-ietf-mpls-tp-te-mib >>> >>> for WG last call. >>> >>> Before the wg last, we would like to check whether >>> there is IPR on the documents that needs to be disclosed. >>> >>> Are you aware of any IPR that applies to the two drafts? >>> If so, has this IPR 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 regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant >>> IPR. The documents will not advance to the next stage until a response >>> has been received from each author and contributor. >>> >>> If you are on the MPLS WG email list but are not listed as an author or >>> contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of an= y >>> IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. >>> If you are aware of IPR's please respond to this mail before May 18th. >>> >>> Thanks, Loa >>> >>> (as MPLS WG co-chair) >>> -- >>> >>> >>> Loa Andersson =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 email: lo= a.andersson@ericsson.com >>> Sr Strategy and Standards Manager =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0loa@pi.nu >>> Ericsson Inc =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0phone: = +46 10 717 52 13 >>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0= =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 +46 767 72 92 13 >> >> >> >> >> >> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >> Please refer to http://www.aricent.com/legal/email_disclaimer.html >> for important disclosures regarding this electronic communication. >> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >> _______________________________________________ >> mpls mailing list >> mpls@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From internet-drafts@ietf.org Mon May 7 12:18:28 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CFC921F865A; Mon, 7 May 2012 12:18:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.481 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.481 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.118, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dyBNBaH++E+X; Mon, 7 May 2012 12:18:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 605FA21F8647; Mon, 7 May 2012 12:18:27 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.02 Message-ID: <20120507191827.13364.29023.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 07 May 2012 12:18:27 -0700 Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label-02.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 May 2012 19:18:28 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working= Group of the IETF. Title : The Use of Entropy Labels in MPLS Forwarding Author(s) : Kireeti Kompella John Drake Shane Amante Wim Henderickx Lucy Yong Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label-02.txt Pages : 23 Date : 2012-05-07 Load balancing is a powerful tool for engineering traffic across a network. This memo suggests ways of improving load balancing across MPLS networks using the concept of "entropy labels". It defines the concept, describes why entropy labels are useful, enumerates properties of entropy labels that allow maximal benefit, and shows how they can be signaled and used for various applications. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label-02.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label-02.txt The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label/ From rcallon@juniper.net Mon May 7 19:06:55 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 336AF21F864E for ; Mon, 7 May 2012 19:06:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.492 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.492 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.106, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NXbWhHphXc58 for ; Mon, 7 May 2012 19:06:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from exprod7og112.obsmtp.com (exprod7og112.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.177]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A64321F864B for ; Mon, 7 May 2012 19:06:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from P-EMHUB02-HQ.jnpr.net ([66.129.224.36]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob112.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKT6h/uyp9QrUDApLjKSLPcAQZpxyJ4xzy@postini.com; Mon, 07 May 2012 19:06:54 PDT Received: from P-CLDFE02-HQ.jnpr.net (172.24.192.60) by P-EMHUB02-HQ.jnpr.net (172.24.192.36) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.213.0; Mon, 7 May 2012 19:06:38 -0700 Received: from p-emfe02-wf.jnpr.net (172.28.145.25) by p-cldfe02-hq.jnpr.net (172.24.192.60) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.355.2; Mon, 7 May 2012 19:06:38 -0700 Received: from EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net ([fe80::1914:3299:33d9:e43b]) by p-emfe02-wf.jnpr.net ([fe80::c126:c633:d2dc:8090%11]) with mapi; Mon, 7 May 2012 22:06:37 -0400 From: Ross Callon To: "mach@huawei.com" , "ppan@infinera.com" , Carlos Pignataro , "rajiva@cisco.com" , "'mpls@ietf.org'" Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 22:06:35 -0400 Thread-Topic: Reminder regarding IPR on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping Thread-Index: Ac0svzJFj8x0V+lnTee+Xr1/T5UJaw== Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_DF7F294AF4153D498141CBEFADB17704C70EFF9E65EMBX01WFjnprn_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [mpls] Reminder regarding IPR on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 02:06:55 -0000 --_000_DF7F294AF4153D498141CBEFADB17704C70EFF9E65EMBX01WFjnprn_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The authors have asked for draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping to be considere= d for adoption as a WG document. Before doing this, we would like to check = whether there is IPR on the document that needs to be disclosed. Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping? = If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see R= FCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). If you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to thi= s email regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. Thi= s document will not advance to the next stage until a response has been rec= eived from each author and contributor. If you are on the MPLS WG email list but are not listed as an author or con= tributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR t= hat has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. Thanks, Ross (as MPLS WG co-chair) --_000_DF7F294AF4153D498141CBEFADB17704C70EFF9E65EMBX01WFjnprn_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The authors have asked for draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping to be considered for adoptio= n as a WG document. Before doing this, we would like to check whether there= is IPR on the document that needs to be disclosed.
 
Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping? If so, has thi= s IPR 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 t= o this email regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR= . This document will not advance to the next stage until a response has bee= n received from each author and contributor.
 
If you are on the MPLS WG email list but are not listed as an author o= r contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any = IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules.
 
Thanks, Ross
(as MPLS WG co-chair)
 
 --_000_DF7F294AF4153D498141CBEFADB17704C70EFF9E65EMBX01WFjnprn_-- From mach.chen@huawei.com Mon May 7 20:04:31 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8FA821F860E for ; Mon, 7 May 2012 20:04:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.556 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.556 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.042, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TQkgxH0AuB-V for ; Mon, 7 May 2012 20:04:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dfwrgout.huawei.com (dfwrgout.huawei.com [206.16.17.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B49C21F84CD for ; Mon, 7 May 2012 20:04:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.9.243 (EHLO dfweml201-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.9.243]) by dfwrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.2.3-GA FastPath) with ESMTP id AFP48052; Mon, 07 May 2012 23:04:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from DFWEML403-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.151) by dfweml201-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.9.107) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Mon, 7 May 2012 20:02:10 -0700 Received: from SZXEML419-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.158) by dfweml403-hub.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.151) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Mon, 7 May 2012 20:02:12 -0700 Received: from SZXEML511-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.4.188]) by szxeml419-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.82.67.158]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Tue, 8 May 2012 11:02:07 +0800 From: Mach Chen To: Ross Callon , "ppan@infinera.com" , Carlos Pignataro , "rajiva@cisco.com" , "'mpls@ietf.org'" Thread-Topic: Reminder regarding IPR on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping Thread-Index: Ac0svzJFj8x0V+lnTee+Xr1/T5UJawAB6nRg Date: Tue, 8 May 2012 03:02:05 +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: [10.108.4.54] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_F73A3CB31E8BE34FA1BBE3C8F0CB2AE21F1299D3SZXEML511MBSchi_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Subject: Re: [mpls] Reminder regarding IPR on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 03:04:31 -0000 --_000_F73A3CB31E8BE34FA1BBE3C8F0CB2AE21F1299D3SZXEML511MBSchi_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Ross, None from my end. Best regards, Mach From: Ross Callon [mailto:rcallon@juniper.net] Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 10:07 AM To: Mach Chen; ppan@infinera.com; Carlos Pignataro; rajiva@cisco.com; 'mpls= @ietf.org' Subject: Reminder regarding IPR on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping The authors have asked for draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping to be considere= d for adoption as a WG document. Before doing this, we would like to check = whether there is IPR on the document that needs to be disclosed. Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping? = If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see R= FCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). If you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to thi= s email regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. Thi= s document will not advance to the next stage until a response has been rec= eived from each author and contributor. If you are on the MPLS WG email list but are not listed as an author or con= tributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR t= hat has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. Thanks, Ross (as MPLS WG co-chair) --_000_F73A3CB31E8BE34FA1BBE3C8F0CB2AE21F1299D3SZXEML511MBSchi_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Ross,

 = ;

None from = my end.

 = ;

Best regar= ds,

Mach<= /o:p>

 = ;

From: Ross Callon [mailto:rcallon@juniper.net]
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 10:07 AM
To: Mach Chen; ppan@infinera.com; Carlos Pignataro; rajiva@cisco.com= ; 'mpls@ietf.org'
Subject: Reminder regarding IPR on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping<= o:p>

 

The authors have asked f= or draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping to be considered for adoption as a WG document. Before= doing this, we would like to check whether there is IPR on the document that needs to be disclosed.

 =

Are you aware of any IPR= that applies to draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping? If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with= IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details).

 =

If you are listed as a d= ocument author or contributor please respond to this email regardless of wh= ether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. This document will not advance to the next stage until a response has been received from= each author and contributor.

 =

If you are on the MPLS W= G email list but are not listed as an author or contributor, then please ex= plicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. <= /p>

 =

Thanks, Ross<= /span>

(as MPLS WG co-chair)

 

--_000_F73A3CB31E8BE34FA1BBE3C8F0CB2AE21F1299D3SZXEML511MBSchi_-- From cpignata@cisco.com Tue May 8 06:36:40 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88FC621F84DD for ; Tue, 8 May 2012 06:36:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -110.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BeVf0sURB2Oj for ; Tue, 8 May 2012 06:36:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 662E721F8499 for ; Tue, 8 May 2012 06:36:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=15991; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1336484199; x=1337693799; h=subject:mime-version:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id: references:to; bh=GzQsYIIggUKyLwkV0wMitmMBelvz9H+VOV/iW9YLK7E=; b=ALGFuFVjpRvRWYCGvwN9UtonTFOszdwqRBt9XpNrFSBiDknpkq/798rJ kOu3BDXT2FF+fJp6QAgYp11i6LyYJKofWNULoavYRvWHZ9rdj7Ivb2rIg XGi12YF4ogdGODOG7+gGWh4NgfGIDM0abAK4HB2Yi8CJkZHnxELnI87ot k=; X-Files: signature.asc : 203 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,551,1330905600"; d="asc'?scan'208,217";a="78285901" Received: from rcdn-core2-2.cisco.com ([173.37.113.189]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP; 08 May 2012 13:36:38 +0000 Received: from rtp-cpignata-8912.cisco.com (rtp-cpignata-8912.cisco.com [10.117.115.51]) by rcdn-core2-2.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q48DabKu018352; Tue, 8 May 2012 13:36:38 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1257) Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_DA5FFEC5-2089-4A7B-8B19-24FEEA693AC7"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 From: Carlos Pignataro In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 8 May 2012 09:36:37 -0400 Message-Id: <447717FF-7A58-455F-9E42-09E828E30C71@cisco.com> References: To: Ping Pan X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1257) Cc: Ross Callon , "'mpls@ietf.org'" Subject: Re: [mpls] Reminder regarding IPR on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 13:36:40 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_DA5FFEC5-2089-4A7B-8B19-24FEEA693AC7 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_70C364C5-DEEA-411E-82A8-ACCF616B85FF" --Apple-Mail=_70C364C5-DEEA-411E-82A8-ACCF616B85FF Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I am not aware of any IPR that applies to = draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping. Thank you, -- Carlos. On May 8, 2012, at 2:52 AM, Ping Pan wrote: > None from here. > =20 > Regards, > =20 > Ping > =20 > From: Mach Chen [mailto:mach.chen@huawei.com]=20 > Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 11:02 AM > To: Ross Callon; Ping Pan; Carlos Pignataro; rajiva@cisco.com; = 'mpls@ietf.org' > Subject: RE: Reminder regarding IPR on = draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping > =20 > Hi Ross, > =20 > None from my end. > =20 > Best regards, > Mach > =20 > From: Ross Callon [mailto:rcallon@juniper.net]=20 > Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 10:07 AM > To: Mach Chen; ppan@infinera.com; Carlos Pignataro; rajiva@cisco.com; = 'mpls@ietf.org' > Subject: Reminder regarding IPR on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping > =20 > The authors have asked for draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping to be = considered for adoption as a WG document. Before doing this, we would = like to check whether there is IPR on the document that needs to be = disclosed. > =20 > Are you aware of any IPR that applies to = draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping? If so, has this IPR 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 please respond = to this email regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant = IPR. This document will not advance to the next stage until a response = has been received from each author and contributor. > =20 > If you are on the MPLS WG email list but 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 > Thanks, Ross > (as MPLS WG co-chair) > =20 --Apple-Mail=_70C364C5-DEEA-411E-82A8-ACCF616B85FF Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii I am not aware of any IPR that applies = to draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping.

Thank = you,

-- Carlos.

On May = 8, 2012, at 2:52 AM, Ping Pan wrote:

None = from here.
From: Mach Chen = [mailto:mach.chen@huawei.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 11:02 = AM
To: Ross = Callon; Ping Pan; Carlos Pignataro; rajiva@cisco.com; ' RE: Reminder regarding IPR = on = draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping
Subject: Re: [mpls] entropy label draft: reserved label for ELI X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 May 2012 20:55:29 -0000 On May 1, 2012, at 11:19 , Kireeti Kompella wrote: > Based on that, I'll update the draft to reflect these changes. ETA: May = 8. Uploaded May 8, to the undying surprise of many! Uploading again today (version -03). The text has been updated to include the agreements made in the WG meeting = and on the list: a) using a reserved label for the ELI; b) associating EL signaling with tunnels rather than apps. There has been much cleanup and internal review; one other significant chan= ge (between 02 and 03) is to acknowledge that EL signaling for multicast LS= Ps needs more specification, and so the idea is to create a separate doc fo= r that; the text on p2mp in draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label has been moved to= section 5.4 and simply says, watch this space! Some other minor changes: "Updates: 3031, 5036" in header; added section on processing ELC optional parameter of Label Mapping message= . CHAIRS: the authors believe draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label-03 is ready for W= G LC. Thanks, Kireeti. From jeff.tantsura@ericsson.com Wed May 9 15:31:00 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA75311E80DB for ; Wed, 9 May 2012 15:31:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.449 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ckbb7YtExv5Y for ; Wed, 9 May 2012 15:31:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imr3.ericy.com (imr3.ericy.com [198.24.6.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC21A11E80D3 for ; Wed, 9 May 2012 15:30:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eusaamw0711.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.178]) by imr3.ericy.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q49MU7WM011465 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Wed, 9 May 2012 17:30:59 -0500 Received: from EUSAACMS0701.eamcs.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.6]) by eusaamw0711.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.178]) with mapi; Wed, 9 May 2012 18:30:50 -0400 From: Jeff Tantsura To: Kireeti Kompella Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 18:30:46 -0400 Thread-Topic: [mpls] entropy label draft: reserved label for ELI Thread-Index: Ac0uM2L7FWDrsTjFTkyFPbtG5+XesQ== Message-ID: <6284BB63-9488-4BB4-BBC0-E8F197CF7C7D@ericsson.com> References: <7ED7E703-9E0D-45DB-919B-854AB546B738@juniper.net> <4E68B396-3D00-49D8-B5CE-3D7F2DF5EACF@juniper.net> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] entropy label draft: reserved label for ELI X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 May 2012 22:31:01 -0000 Hi, I support progressing the draft towards LC. Regards, Jeff On May 9, 2012, at 13:55, "Kireeti Kompella" wrote: > On May 1, 2012, at 11:19 , Kireeti Kompella wrote: >=20 >> Based on that, I'll update the draft to reflect these changes. ETA: May= 8. >=20 > Uploaded May 8, to the undying surprise of many! >=20 > Uploading again today (version -03). >=20 > The text has been updated to include the agreements made in the WG meetin= g and on the list: > a) using a reserved label for the ELI; > b) associating EL signaling with tunnels rather than apps. >=20 > There has been much cleanup and internal review; one other significant ch= ange (between 02 and 03) is to acknowledge that EL signaling for multicast = LSPs needs more specification, and so the idea is to create a separate doc = for that; the text on p2mp in draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label has been moved = to section 5.4 and simply says, watch this space! >=20 > Some other minor changes: > "Updates: 3031, 5036" in header; > added section on processing ELC optional parameter of Label Mapping messa= ge. >=20 > CHAIRS: the authors believe draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label-03 is ready for= WG LC. >=20 > Thanks, > Kireeti. >=20 > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Wed May 9 15:37:03 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDF6811E80E7; Wed, 9 May 2012 15:37:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.533 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.533 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.066, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id akhFGcx3UpEK; Wed, 9 May 2012 15:37:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ABBE11E8086; Wed, 9 May 2012 15:37:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.02 Message-ID: <20120509223702.14866.44285.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 09 May 2012 15:37:02 -0700 Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label-03.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 May 2012 22:37:03 -0000 --NextPart A new Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group of the IETF. Title : The Use of Entropy Labels in MPLS Forwarding Author(s) : K. Kompella, et al Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label Pages : 23 Date : May 9, 2012 Load balancing is a powerful tool for engineering traffic across a network. This memo suggests ways of improving load balancing across MPLS networks using the concept of "entropy labels". It defines the concept, describes why entropy labels are useful, enumerates properties of entropy labels that allow maximal benefit, and shows how they can be signaled and used for various applications. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label-03.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2012-05-09153702.I-D@ietf.org> --NextPart-- From stbryant@cisco.com Thu May 10 04:53:30 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5E0821F8634 for ; Thu, 10 May 2012 04:53:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -110.502 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.502 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.097, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6ejHaqe2BGoR for ; Thu, 10 May 2012 04:53:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ams-iport-2.cisco.com (ams-iport-2.cisco.com [144.254.224.141]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19CB721F8633 for ; Thu, 10 May 2012 04:53:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=stbryant@cisco.com; l=649; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1336650810; x=1337860410; h=message-id:date:from:reply-to:mime-version:to:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=GcZrFaikQTby7VBKihzAGCEAVBZTtrHxwkiuPB4awkA=; b=fhMPF+E0WP3JxirOAI9HMVQxNowvYO+439suqFKT10sCSj2MFtD4krWh opJFK3auOlRCYt1c6moBRKASnXyvwbZ3ujT9FirUHyemsg9WvhQOHfz1e yp8O5EG0nbOWuxLAWv/MJL7aK5+jJyiIhp/CCQw3DYNlC9WhCueFubn95 0=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgkFALyrq0+Q/khN/2dsb2JhbABEsByDa4EHghUBAQEEEgECIzoGEQsYCRYPCQMCAQIBRRMIAQEeh2ybFINFEJxJixKDA4MmBJV9jleBAmeCag X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,565,1330905600"; d="scan'208";a="72880577" Received: from ams-core-4.cisco.com ([144.254.72.77]) by ams-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 10 May 2012 11:53:29 +0000 Received: from cisco.com (mrwint.cisco.com [64.103.70.36]) by ams-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q4ABrT3b023194 for ; Thu, 10 May 2012 11:53:29 GMT Received: from dhcp-bdlk10-data-vlan300-64-103-107-172.cisco.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cisco.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id q4ABrOmn000544; Thu, 10 May 2012 12:53:25 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <4FABAC34.2010108@cisco.com> Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 12:53:24 +0100 From: Stewart Bryant User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120327 Thunderbird/11.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mpls@ietf.org References: <7ED7E703-9E0D-45DB-919B-854AB546B738@juniper.net> <2C2F1EBA8050E74EA81502D5740B4BD6BC12CB9828@SJEXCHCCR02.corp.ad.broadcom.com> <18675970-8537-4A1B-8C0D-E9848F70AAE1@juniper.net> In-Reply-To: <18675970-8537-4A1B-8C0D-E9848F70AAE1@juniper.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [mpls] entropy label draft: reserved label for ELI X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: stbryant@cisco.com List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 11:53:31 -0000 On 13/04/2012 20:16, Kireeti Kompella wrote: > Hi Shahram, > > On Apr 12, 2012, at 18:01 , Shahram Davari wrote: > >> Hi Kireeti, >> >> What is the relationship between this EL and the fat Label (RFC6391)? > Same thing. > >> Can they both coexist? How many Entropy Labels can exist in a stack? How many ELI can exist in a stack? > Yes, they can coexist. In theoretical cases, there can be many entropy labels; each one, except the fat PW entropy label, must be preceded by an ELI. > To complete the sentence, .. and the Fat Label MAY be preceded by an ELI. The ELI has the same sematics as the signalling in the PW case. Stewart From rajiva@cisco.com Fri May 11 06:46:41 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C2A121F86F0 for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 06:46:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.223 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.223 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.376, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zZrOzQlbpafW for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 06:46:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com [173.37.86.74]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8A6821F86DF for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 06:46:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=rajiva@cisco.com; l=1507; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1336744001; x=1337953601; h=mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date: message-id:in-reply-to:references:from:to:cc; bh=6jOMjUSOeUBOqOag68A5swdWD3+u0D18G0Jg1qGt8dQ=; b=Q4+yVN2Eghjbjd5TGbisjElUkJu+9GKlsDTT1AWSZBl1lds2Kus5n7mM +qDsKMVyvUUZlniQ3hWMy3nd7KxUPgVdczJOqMThSD+8tR/8tzkFQmnxD gwY2p1Pr6g9nR+9wHkZesmn08iZ4u2cIV8gVgRJHtc18ycWJuh1lDeQ7A Y=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgMFAJAXrU+tJXG+/2dsb2JhbABEsgcBAQGCG4EHghUBAQEDARIBHQo6BQULAgEIEQMBAgsGGAYBTggBAQQTCBqHZwWae6APixeCd4JDYwSIZJtwgWmDB4FB X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,571,1330905600"; d="scan'208";a="82400751" Received: from rcdn-core2-3.cisco.com ([173.37.113.190]) by rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 11 May 2012 13:46:38 +0000 Received: from xbh-rcd-302.cisco.com (xbh-rcd-302.cisco.com [72.163.63.9]) by rcdn-core2-3.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q4BDkbj8004391; Fri, 11 May 2012 13:46:38 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-212.cisco.com ([72.163.62.219]) by xbh-rcd-302.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 11 May 2012 08:46:28 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 08:46:25 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Reminder regarding IPR on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping Thread-Index: Ac0vchKwfGGnp1L2RA+7eEjyaos3TwACZgVw References: From: "Rajiv Asati (rajiva)" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 May 2012 13:46:28.0425 (UTC) FILETIME=[7719EB90:01CD2F7C] Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] Reminder regarding IPR on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 13:46:41 -0000 I am not aware of any IPR relating to this draft. Cheers, Rajiv =20 > From: Ross Callon >=20 > Subject: Reminder regarding IPR on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp- > ping >=20 > Date: May 7, 2012 10:06:35 PM EDT >=20 > To: "mach@huawei.com" , > "ppan@infinera.com" , Carlos Pignataro > , "rajiva@cisco.com" , > "'mpls@ietf.org'" >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > The authors have asked for draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping to be > considered for adoption as a WG document. Before doing this, we would > like to check whether there is IPR on the document that needs to be > disclosed. >=20 > Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw- > lsp-ping? If so, has this IPR 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 please respond > to this email regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. > This document will not advance to the next stage until a response has been > received from each author and contributor. >=20 > If you are on the MPLS WG email list but 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 > Thanks, Ross > (as MPLS WG co-chair) >=20 >=20 From rcallon@juniper.net Fri May 11 07:26:46 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1476321F86F1 for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 07:26:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.501 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.501 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.097, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id C-PlOgPyLtk9 for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 07:26:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from exprod7og118.obsmtp.com (exprod7og118.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.8]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BD7321F86F0 for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 07:26:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from P-EMHUB01-HQ.jnpr.net ([66.129.224.36]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob118.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKT60hpN5iQe9nK+ywqkH8MtOu2vql7fZo@postini.com; Fri, 11 May 2012 07:26:45 PDT Received: from p-emfe01-wf.jnpr.net (172.28.145.24) by P-EMHUB01-HQ.jnpr.net (172.24.192.35) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.213.0; Fri, 11 May 2012 07:24:54 -0700 Received: from EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net ([fe80::1914:3299:33d9:e43b]) by p-emfe01-wf.jnpr.net ([fe80::d0d1:653d:5b91:a123%11]) with mapi; Fri, 11 May 2012 10:24:23 -0400 From: Ross Callon To: "'mpls@ietf.org'" Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 10:24:22 -0400 Thread-Topic: Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping Thread-Index: Ac0vgcJX70M9Do4pRz++u0vZUWYe/w== Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_DF7F294AF4153D498141CBEFADB17704C70F1A932FEMBX01WFjnprn_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [mpls] Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 14:26:46 -0000 --_000_DF7F294AF4153D498141CBEFADB17704C70F1A932FEMBX01WFjnprn_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Working Group, This is to start a two week poll to see if there is support to adopt draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping as an mpls working group draft. Pleased send your comments to the mpls working group mailing list (mpls@iet= f.org). This poll ends at the end of the day May 25, 2012 Ross for the mpls wg chairs --_000_DF7F294AF4153D498141CBEFADB17704C70F1A932FEMBX01WFjnprn_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Working Group,
 
This is to start a two week poll to see if there is support to adopt
 
    draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping
 
as an mpls working group draft.
 
 
This poll ends at the end of the day May 25, 2012
 
Ross
for the mpls wg chairs
 
 --_000_DF7F294AF4153D498141CBEFADB17704C70F1A932FEMBX01WFjnprn_-- From loa@pi.nu Fri May 11 07:53:02 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A130121F8760 for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 07:53:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oLIy8DO6Bats for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 07:53:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.pi.nu (mail.pi.nu [194.71.127.148]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADE6221F8528 for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 07:52:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.104] (unknown [121.54.51.4]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by mail.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7CD8D2A8002; Fri, 11 May 2012 16:52:53 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4FAD27C6.7060309@pi.nu> Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 16:52:54 +0200 From: Loa Andersson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "mpls@ietf.org" , "mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org" , MPLS-TP ad hoc team Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [mpls] mpls working group last call on X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 14:53:02 -0000 Worling Group, this is to start a two week (+) working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-te-mib-03. Please send your comments to the MPLS wg mailing list (mpls@ietf.org) before eob June 4 2012. All the co-authors has responded that they are not aware of existing IPR's for this draft. However the call for IPR declarations from other working group members are still open (end date is May 18th), but since all the authors has responded to the IPR call and we for other reasons allow for an extra week of wg last call we see no reason to wait starting this wg last call. /Loa for the wg co-chairs -- Loa Andersson email: loa.andersson@ericsson.com Sr Strategy and Standards Manager loa@pi.nu Ericsson Inc phone: +46 10 717 52 13 +46 767 72 92 13 From quintin.zhao@huawei.com Fri May 11 12:21:52 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B171A21F8702 for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 12:21:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.15 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.15 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, MSGID_MULTIPLE_AT=1.449] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oCFjiyHPoso0 for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 12:21:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dfwrgout.huawei.com (dfwrgout.huawei.com [206.16.17.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40EA421F8700 for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 12:21:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.9.243 (EHLO dfweml202-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.9.243]) by dfwrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.2.3-GA FastPath) with ESMTP id AGC42658; Fri, 11 May 2012 15:21:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from DFWEML405-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.102) by dfweml202-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.9.108) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Fri, 11 May 2012 12:20:35 -0700 Received: from QZHAO (10.212.245.251) by dfweml405-hub.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.102) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.323.3; Fri, 11 May 2012 12:20:29 -0700 From: Quintin Zhao To: References: In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 15:20:21 -0400 Message-ID: <003401cd2fab$1c9cbec0$55d63c40$@zhao@huawei.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: Ac0vqKyT0zeXvGIBSASs+tdF2ILxxQAAa4xg Content-Language: zh-cn X-Originating-IP: [10.212.245.251] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 19:21:52 -0000 Support! Quintin ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 10:24:22 -0400 From: Ross Callon To: "'mpls@ietf.org'" Subject: [mpls] Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Working Group, This is to start a two week poll to see if there is support to adopt draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping as an mpls working group draft. Pleased send your comments to the mpls working group mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). This poll ends at the end of the day May 25, 2012 Ross for the mpls wg chairs -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ ** From loa@pi.nu Fri May 11 20:19:18 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20F4721F85A5 for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 20:19:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1jDN6IlgRs9y for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 20:19:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.pi.nu (mail.pi.nu [194.71.127.148]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DABD21F85A3 for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 20:19:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.104] (unknown [121.54.51.4]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by mail.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1A4DC2A8002; Sat, 12 May 2012 05:19:13 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4FADD6B2.90705@pi.nu> Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 05:19:14 +0200 From: Loa Andersson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "mpls@ietf.org" , "mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org" , MPLS-TP ad hoc team References: <4FAD27C6.7060309@pi.nu> In-Reply-To: <4FAD27C6.7060309@pi.nu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [mpls] Correction: mpls working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-te-mib-03 X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 03:19:18 -0000 Folks, my web-mail sometimes cut the subject line; the correct subject should be "mpls working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-te-mib-03". /Loa On 2012-05-11 16:52, Loa Andersson wrote: > Worling Group, > > this is to start a two week (+) working group last call on > draft-ietf-mpls-tp-te-mib-03. > > Please send your comments to the MPLS wg mailing list (mpls@ietf.org) > before eob June 4 2012. > > All the co-authors has responded that they are not aware of > existing IPR's for this draft. However the call for IPR > declarations from other working group members are still > open (end date is May 18th), but since all the authors has > responded to the IPR call and we for other reasons allow for an > extra week of wg last call we see no reason to wait starting > this wg last call. > > /Loa > for the wg co-chairs -- Loa Andersson email: loa.andersson@ericsson.com Sr Strategy and Standards Manager loa@pi.nu Ericsson Inc phone: +46 10 717 52 13 +46 767 72 92 13 From agmalis@gmail.com Sat May 12 07:05:03 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E230721F866E for ; Sat, 12 May 2012 07:05:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id am9glTH5wsn7 for ; Sat, 12 May 2012 07:05:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ob0-f172.google.com (mail-ob0-f172.google.com [209.85.214.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6041721F866C for ; Sat, 12 May 2012 07:05:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by obbeh20 with SMTP id eh20so5697097obb.31 for ; Sat, 12 May 2012 07:05:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=TaI/tsyd558EzDAqe8DfbMCsLIoA7HyNhMCDFxoCaF0=; b=TcoRuGwgBxwS+xlXO0uRSBQbC4wPbD4kLvBVspItF65l6COrJykO6tCt6uQ+buVAFR GMoj05wutrfrbJsYBCeDBmUqqxdubEDKMYowEN8vgI166eNtLyEGg7nLjM9wMjzz4ISo 82z/lUuCvte7+/Lixt9d2xTXEGsIlz5kIyjhrAsQSwdbDfhtV0a+xjMaQoFw2Te0ohHQ In5PhLLtN3ugpp/cO5ueWQUl7nEXdirlL3XA/R+Qlnf/7PGlet3+3VfcpjGDOYSpCcC1 ClgRc/fvH3upf9FePee3kVPrNZ5hSnwsYXY0UgZ8EyxL3a5tMqQwUYciPTu3Hm6rUsmy dI5Q== Received: by 10.50.158.168 with SMTP id wv8mr920660igb.11.1336831501780; Sat, 12 May 2012 07:05:01 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.50.184.231 with HTTP; Sat, 12 May 2012 07:04:40 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6284BB63-9488-4BB4-BBC0-E8F197CF7C7D@ericsson.com> References: <7ED7E703-9E0D-45DB-919B-854AB546B738@juniper.net> <4E68B396-3D00-49D8-B5CE-3D7F2DF5EACF@juniper.net> <6284BB63-9488-4BB4-BBC0-E8F197CF7C7D@ericsson.com> From: "Andrew G. Malis" Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 10:04:40 -0400 Message-ID: To: Jeff Tantsura Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] entropy label draft: reserved label for ELI X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 14:05:03 -0000 +1 On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 6:30 PM, Jeff Tantsura wrote: > Hi, > > I support progressing the draft towards LC. > > Regards, > Jeff > > On May 9, 2012, at 13:55, "Kireeti Kompella" wrote: > >> On May 1, 2012, at 11:19 , Kireeti Kompella wrote: >> >>> Based on that, I'll update the draft to reflect these changes. =A0ETA: = May 8. >> >> Uploaded May 8, to the undying surprise of many! >> >> Uploading again today (version -03). >> >> The text has been updated to include the agreements made in the WG meeti= ng and on the list: >> a) using a reserved label for the ELI; >> b) associating EL signaling with tunnels rather than apps. >> >> There has been much cleanup and internal review; one other significant c= hange (between 02 and 03) is to acknowledge that EL signaling for multicast= LSPs needs more specification, and so the idea is to create a separate doc= for that; the text on p2mp in draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label has been moved= to section 5.4 and simply says, watch this space! >> >> Some other minor changes: >> "Updates: 3031, 5036" in header; >> added section on processing ELC optional parameter of Label Mapping mess= age. >> >> CHAIRS: the authors believe draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label-03 is ready fo= r WG LC. >> >> Thanks, >> Kireeti. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpls mailing list >> mpls@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From iesg-secretary@ietf.org Mon May 14 15:55:32 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 857B421F861E; Mon, 14 May 2012 15:55:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.542 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.542 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.057, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 95zs3H0KsRwK; Mon, 14 May 2012 15:55:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 505FC21F8931; Mon, 14 May 2012 15:55:31 -0700 (PDT) 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: 4.02 Message-ID: <20120514225531.8458.1967.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 15:55:31 -0700 Cc: mpls mailing list , mpls chair , RFC Editor Subject: [mpls] Document Action: 'An Overview of the OAM Tool Set for MPLS based Transport Networks' to Informational RFC (draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-analysis-09.txt) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 22:55:32 -0000 The IESG has approved the following document: - 'An Overview of the OAM Tool Set for MPLS based Transport Networks' (draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-analysis-09.txt) as Informational RFC This document is the product of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group. The IESG contact persons are Adrian Farrel and Stewart Bryant. A URL of this Internet Draft is: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-analysis/ Technical Summary This document provides an overview of the OAM toolset for MPLS based Transport Networks. The toolset consists of a comprehensive set of fault management and performance monitoring capabilities (operating in the data-plane) which are appropriate for transport networks as required in RFC 5860 and support the network and services at different nested levels. This overview includes a brief recap of MPLS-TP OAM requirements and functions, and of generic mechanisms created in the MPLS data plane to allow the OAM packets run in-band and share their fate with data packets. The protocol definitions for each of the MPLS-TP OAM tools are defined in separate documents (RFCs or Working Group drafts) which are referenced by this document. Working Group Summary This informational document has passed working group last call with clear consensus in favor of publication. Document Quality This is an informational document which is not subject to be implemented. It provides description of and pointers to other documents, for which there are multiple current implementations and/or implementations in progress. Personnel Ross Callon (rcallon@juniper.net) is the Document Shepherd Adrian Farrel (adrian@olddog.co.uk) is the Responsible AD RFC Editor Note Section 1.1 OLD o The OAM toolset developed for MPLS based transport networks needs to be fully inter-operable with existing MPLS OAM tools as documented in [RFC 5860]. NEW o The OAM toolset developed for MPLS based transport networks needs to be fully inter-operable with existing MPLS OAM tools as documented in section 2.1.5. of [RFC 5860]. END --- Section 1.1 OLD However, compatibility with the existing tools has been maintained. NEW However, compatibility with the existing MPLS tools has been maintained. END --- Section 4 Table 2 OLD +------------------------+---------------------------------+--------+ | OAM Functions | OAM Tools/Protocols | RFCs | +------------------------+---------------------------------+--------+ | Connectivity | LSP Ping | [RFC | | Verification | | 6426] | +------------------------+---------------------------------+--------+ | Diagnostic: Loopback | (1) G-ACh based Loopback and | [RFC | | and Lock Instruct | Lock Instruct, (2) LSP Ping | 6435] | +------------------------+---------------------------------+--------+ +------------------------+---------------------------------+--------+ | Lock Instruct(LI) | Flag in AIS message | [RFC | | | | 6427] | +------------------------+---------------------------------+--------+ NEW +------------------------+---------------------------------+--------+ | OAM Functions | OAM Tools/Protocols | RFCs | +------------------------+---------------------------------+--------+ | Connectivity | LSP Ping | [RFC | | Verification | | 6426] | +------------------------+---------------------------------+--------+ | Lock Instruct (LI) | (1) G-ACh based Loopback, | [RFC | | | (2) Lock Instruct (LI) | 6435] | +------------------------+---------------------------------+--------+ | Lock Report (LKR) | Flag in AIS message | [RFC | | | | 6427] | +------------------------+---------------------------------+--------+ END --- Section 5.2, third paragraph OLD The Lock operation instruction is carried in an MPLS Loopback request message sent from a MEP to a trail-end MEP of the LSP to request that the LSP be taken out of service. In response, the Lock operation reply is carried in a Loopback response message sent from the trail- end MEP back to the originating MEP to report the result. NEW [RFC6435] defines a mechanism where a lock instruction is sent by a management application to both ends of a point-to-point LSP requesting them to take the LSP out-of-service. When an endpoint gets the management request, it locks the LSP and sends a Lock Instruct message to the other end of the LSP. The Lock Instruct message is carried in a Generic ACH message and is sent periodically. The time between successive messages is no longer than the value set in the Refresh Timer field of the Lock Instruct message. An LSP end point keeps the LSP locked while it is either receiving the periodic Lock Instruct messages or has an in-force lock instruction from the management application. Note that since the management application will receive a management plane response from both ends of the LSP confirming that the LSP has been locked, there is no requirement for the Lock Instruct message to have a response. Therefore, [RFC6435] does not define a Lock Instruct response message. END --- Section 7,paragraph 3 OLD OAM in general is always an area where the security risk is high, e.g. confidential information may be intercepted for attackers to again access to the networks, therefore authentication, authorization, and encryption need to be enforced for prevent security breach. NEW OAM in general is always an area where the security risk is high. For example, confidential information may be intercepted by attackers to gain access to networks, therefore authentication, authorization, and encryption need to be enforced to prevent security breaches. END --- Section 7, paragraph 4: OLD In addition to implement security protocol, tools, and mechanisms, following strict operation security procedures is very important, especially MPSL-TP static provisioning processes involve operator direct interactions with NMS and devices, its critical to prevent human errors and malicious attacks. NEW It is also important to strictly follow operational security procedures. For example, in the case of MPLS-TP static provisioning, the operator interacts directly with the NMS and devices, and it is critical to prevent human errors as well as malicious attacks. END --- Section 7, final paragraph OLD Since MPLS-TP OAM uses G-ACh, the security risks and mitigation described in [RFC 5085] apply here. In short, the G-ACh could be intercepted, or false G-ACh packets could be inserted. DoS attack could happen by flooding G-ACh messages to peer devices. To mitigate this type of attacks, throttling mechanisms can be used. For more details, please see [RFC 5085]. NEW Since MPLS-TP OAM uses G-ACh, the security risks and mitigations described in [RFC 5085] also apply here. In short, messages on the G-ACh could be intercepted, or false G-ACh packets could be inserted. Additionally DoS attacks can be mounted by flooding G-ACh messages to peer devices. To mitigate this type of attack, throttling mechanisms or rate limits can be used. For more details, please see [RFC 5085]. END --- Section 8., paragraph 3: s/doecument/document/ --- Section 9.2 OLD ID draft-ietf-mpls-tp-security-framework-02, May 2011. NEW draft-ietf-mpls-tp-security-framework-03, October 2011. END --- Spaces in reference tags.Please feel free to change any and all reference tags so that they do not contain space characters. From cpignata@cisco.com Mon May 14 19:38:12 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E44C9E8006 for ; Mon, 14 May 2012 19:38:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -110.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uaMEPzqDX3Jo for ; Mon, 14 May 2012 19:38:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.86.73]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C55C9E8004 for ; Mon, 14 May 2012 19:38:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=cpignata@cisco.com; l=29283; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1337049490; x=1338259090; h=subject:mime-version:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id: references:to; bh=lisXqVnAzKRwjaTz0OlMpV7FZI1rLpMPBNwGAupGGAE=; b=XZGFwZtH1tsd1GrzrfRg+RADpcZ6o7IymMXFR+ufgJ/y7V/0ADtuIbzH GLZhowQeAaPcfi2d93facZgn6R2Y2kw3FBQJC/cjR4bEPQjNF3OJWC6zU OZlyp66jeYFrE0CrJ62Rz3lpMl+hXY/zTJpmX+CXaib1SuZ+vwVpMhg5f 4=; X-Files: signature.asc : 203 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApcFAEPBsU+tJXG+/2dsb2JhbABEqjUBiUSBB4IVAQEBAwEBAQEPAQdUCwULCzgOJzAZCRmHZwULmwCgFIsSGYUEYwSOd4cGgRGNRoFpgwWBQw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,590,1330905600"; d="asc'?scan'208,217";a="83183295" Received: from rcdn-core2-3.cisco.com ([173.37.113.190]) by rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 15 May 2012 02:38:09 +0000 Received: from rtp-cpignata-89111.cisco.com (rtp-cpignata-89111.cisco.com [10.117.115.60]) by rcdn-core2-3.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q4F2c80a027330; Tue, 15 May 2012 02:38:08 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1278) Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_1606C275-5BAB-4765-8F59-E84A9F1D0781"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 From: Carlos Pignataro In-Reply-To: <074201cd26cf$b9992680$2ccb7380$@olddog.co.uk> Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 22:38:07 -0400 Message-Id: <33D1C6A0-AC48-4135-8E97-95B1AD619206@cisco.com> References: <074201cd26cf$b9992680$2ccb7380$@olddog.co.uk> To: adrian@olddog.co.uk X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1278) Cc: mpls@ietf.org, draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm@tools.ietf.org, mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] AD review of draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 02:38:12 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_1606C275-5BAB-4765-8F59-E84A9F1D0781 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_87B30E16-125E-4191-94F1-1B0A906B9BAB" --Apple-Mail=_87B30E16-125E-4191-94F1-1B0A906B9BAB Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Adrian, Many thanks for your usually thorough review. We are spinning a new I-D = after hitting "send", please do ensure all the issues are satisfactorily = addressed. Additionally, please see inline. On Apr 30, 2012, at 8:49 AM, Adrian Farrel wrote: > Hello authors of draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm, >=20 > I have conducted my usual AD review of your draft in response to the > publication request from the WG. This, of itself, is not reason to > induce panic :-) >=20 > My review has yielded a number of questions and nits. All of the > points are open for discussion and I am not mandating changes. But > I think that there are enough issues here to warrant a new revision. >=20 > I have put the document into "revised I-D" state and look forward to > a new version or a lively email debate. >=20 > Thanks, > Adrian >=20 > --- >=20 > I am confused by whether you propose GTSM to be enabled by default.=20 >=20 > Section 1 says... > GTSM specifies that it SHOULD NOT be enabled by default in order to > remain backward-compatible with the unmodified protocol >=20 > Section 1.2 says... > GTSM and will require (statically or dynamically) disabling GTSM. > See Section 3. >=20 > Section 3 says... >=20 > The reason GTSM is enabled for Basic Discovery by default >=20 > Indeed, 5082 says... >=20 > 3. Use of GTSM is OPTIONAL, and can be configured on a per-peer > (group) basis. >=20 > In fact, I don't think GTSM is enabled by default in your document. I > think what you have is that the desire to use GTSM (i.e., the > negotiation to use it) is enabled by default in implementations of = your > spec. But this is subtly different from what the text says. >=20 Correct. Text updated. > --- >=20 > Can you tidy the English in Section 1. Suggested... >=20 > OLD > GTSM specifies that it SHOULD NOT be enabled by default in order to > remain backward-compatible with the unmodified protocol; this > document specifies having a built-in dynamic GTSM capability > negotiation for LDP to suggest the use of GTSM, provided GTSM is not > enabled unless both peers can detect each others' support for GTSM > procedures and agree on its usage as described in this document. > NEW > GTSM specifies that it should not be enabled by default; this > facilitates backward-compatibility with the unmodified protocol. = This > document specifies a dynamic negotiation for the an LDP peer to=20 > suggest the use of GTSM. GTSM will be used as specified in this > document provided both peers on an LDP session can detect each > others' support for GTSM and agree to use it. > END >=20 I updated the text, slightly different "NEW" but hopefully tidied up. > Note the change s/SHOULD NOT/should not/. This text in Section 1 is = not > defining any protocol behavior and comes before the citation of RFC=20 > 2119. It doesn't need to use upper case. >=20 I agree S1 is not defining protocol. However, the "SHOULD NOT" (capital) = is because it is sentence verbatim from RFC 5082 where it is defining = protocol. I made that more clear by enclosing in quotes. > --- >=20 > You need to do some work to expand acronyms on first use if they are = not > listed with an asterisk at: >=20 > http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc-style-guide/abbrev.expansion.txt >=20 > I found: >=20 > LSR >=20 I thought I had done this. Seems that LSR escaped -- I do not see = another one. Fixed. > --- >=20 > Is it time to define an IANA registry for the common Hello parameters > bit fields? Had one existed, you would not have needed to update 5036. > If you create one now, future bit users will not have to update your > RFC. OK, let the lively email debate begin here indeed! We thought it was time indeed. This is why we had taken the time to = create an I-D on "LDP IANA Considerations", and specify the Common Hello = Parameters bit field IANA registry at = http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-iana-01#section-2.3. We = also took the extra time to comb through all of RFC 5036 and add every = missing one to this I-D, in hopes of preventing this issue in the future = for LDP. However, Adrian Farrel observed that = http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mpls/current/msg07321.html So that is not a bit field, really, it is an opaque semanticless = reserved space. >=20 > --- >=20 > Section 2.1 >=20 > The G flag is meaingful only if T and R flags are set to 0 (which > must be the case for Basic Discovery), otherwise, the value of G = flag > SHOULD be ignored on receipt. >=20 > This is clear for the T flag: the use of GTSM is not supported for=20 > targeted (extended) Hellos. >=20 > Why is this the case for the R flag? The use of the R flag is making a=20= > request, not demanding use. It might be the normal case that you would > not set the R flag unless you were more than one hop away, but it does > not follow that this is the case, does it? As indicated in RFC 5036, a > Hello receiver that does not support targeted Hellos ignores the > request (i.e., the R flag). That would clear it to support the G flag. Agreed. Removed the "and R" flag. >=20 > --- >=20 > Section 2.1 >=20 > Any LSR not supporting GTSM for LDP, as defined in this document, > would continue to ignore the G flag, independent of T and R flags' > value, as per Section 3.5.2 of [RFC5036]. >=20 > I think you need to cover two cases. As it happens the behavior you = are > asking for is the same, but I think you need to call out the two cases > separately: >=20 > 1. An LSR that does not recognise the G flag. > 2. An LSR that does recognise the G flag but does not support GTSM=20 > (either through implementation or configuration). >=20 Sure. Done, please check if the updated text covers this adequately.=20 > --- >=20 > Section 2.2 >=20 > Firstly, LSRs using LDP Basic Discovery [RFC5036] send LDP Hello > messages to link-level multicast address (224.0.0.2 or "all > routers"). Such messages are never forwarded beyond one hop and > assumed to have their IP TTL or Hop Count =3D 1. >=20 > This assumption is, I think, new in your document. I can't find = anything > about this in 5036 (although I may have missed it). >=20 > I suspect you need to change this from an assumption to a = RECOMMENDation >=20 OK. Surprisingly (to me) I also did not find it in 5036 or 3036. = Initially I thought that was potentially outside this doc, but I agree = with you. Changed to "RECOMMENDED" > --- >=20 > Section 2.2 >=20 > An LSR that is capable of applying GTSM procedures to the subsequent > TCP/LDP peering session MUST set the G flag (for GTSM) to 1 in = Common > Hello Parameter TLV in the LDP Link Hello message [RFC5036]. >=20 > "capable" is such an interesting word :-) > And the text here is interesting. Does this cut into the discussion of > defaults above? What you are saying is that a device that has been = coded > to support GTSM has to negotiate its use regardless of operator > preferences. Why? No, "capable and willing" :-) >=20 > How would the following look? >=20 > Unless configured otherwise, an LSR that supports GTSM sets the G=20 > flag (for GTSM) to 1 in Common Hello Parameter TLV in the LDP Link > Hello message [RFC5036]. >=20 OK, I took this as a baseline and slightly updated it. > --- >=20 > Section 2.2 >=20 > An LSR, upon receiving an LDP Link Hello message, would recognize = the > presence of G flag (in Common Hello Parameter TLV) only if it > supports GTSM for LDP, as specified in this document. >=20 > This is not true :-( > You are updating 5036 so all new implementations will recognise the G=20= > flag whether or not they support GTSM. >=20 Agree. See below. > --- >=20 > Section 2.2 >=20 > If an LSR > recognizes the presence of G flag with the value =3D1 in the = received > LDP Link Hello message, then it MUST enforce GTSM for LDP in the > subsequent TCP/LDP peering session with the neighbor that sent the > Hello message, as specified in Section 2.3 of this document. >=20 > Again, this does not offer the operator any control or choice in the=20= > matter. Why is the use of GTSM not configurable? >=20 Agree. Text updated to address the two comments.. > --- >=20 > Section 2.2 >=20 > If an LSR that has sent the LDP Link Hello with G flag =3D 1, then = the > LSR MUST set IP TTL or Hop Count =3D 255 in the forthcoming TCP > Transport Connection(s) with that neighbor (e.g., LSR2). Please see > Section 2.3 for more details about the TCP transport connection > specifics. >=20 > Why is this MUST? What if the peer has responded with G=3D0 indicating = it > doesn't support (or want to use) GTSM? Surely, in that case, the local > LSR can set any TTL. Yes... >=20 > BTW Why is this paragraph in Section 2.2? ... and in fact this is the first para of S2.3. >=20 > --- >=20 > I think the mentions of "LSR2" in sections 2.2 and 2.3 are a little=20 > unnecessary. >=20 I agree. I think they are there for extra clarity, and do not hurt, but = can be removed. > --- >=20 > Are we missing a discussion of what happens if the value of G changes = on > a subsequent Hello? >=20 Perhaps, but that negative testing is also not defined for the T and R = bits of RFC 5036 (that I could see). However it is implied from the = procedures. > --- >=20 > Section 3 >=20 > Typo >=20 > s/en the third case/In the third case/ Thanks :-) >=20 > --- >=20 > Section 5 >=20 > Suppose I touch the setting of the G flag in transit? >=20 > That means that LDP Hello security is more important, right? In that case you would not be off-link.=20 "This document increases the security for LDP, making it more = resilient to off-link attacks." I think this spec states its scope clearly, and if you touch the G flag = on-link, we have worst problems. Is that oversimplifying or do you see something blatantly missing from = the Security Considerations? >=20 > --- >=20 > Section 5 >=20 > Shouldn't you make reference to the security section of 5082. In=20 > particular, you need to highlight the things GTSM does not protect=20 > against. >=20 We could cite the Security Considerations of RFC 5082. However, the = Security Considerations of RFC 5082 is about half of RFC 5082. This is = partly because it deals with the most generic cases of GTSM including = Tunnels, multi-hop, etc. I think that it is a bit implied, but explicit = security sounds better than implicit. > --- >=20 > I believe your document should give stronger hints than the generic > comments in 5082 about what should be done with an LDP message that > "fails" a GTSM TTL check. This is appropriate because you are writing > a protocol-specific application of GTSM. >=20 We basically point to Section 3 of RFC 5082 for this, which says: + Dangerous: these are packets that have been identified as belonging to one of the GTSM-enabled sessions, but their TTL values are NOT within the expected range, and hence GTSM believes there is a risk that these packets have been spoofed. ... + MAY drop packets classified as Dangerous. So we purposely did not want to force a policy to drop. This is = something that, during the writing of RFC 5082, was explicitly = requested. Do you feel we should have a more prescriptive guideance (not using the = "P" (policy) word)? Which way do you think should hint more strongly? Adrian, many thanks again for your review, it greatly improves the = document!!! -- Carlos. > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >=20 --Apple-Mail=_87B30E16-125E-4191-94F1-1B0A906B9BAB Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

Additionally, please see = inline.

On Apr 30, 2012, at 8:49 AM, Adrian = Farrel wrote:

Hello authors of draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm,

I = have conducted my usual AD review of your draft in response to = the
publication request from the WG. This, of itself, is not reason = to
induce panic :-)

My review has yielded a number of = questions and nits. All of the
points are open for discussion and I = am not mandating changes. But
I think that there are enough issues = here to warrant a new revision.

I have put the document into = "revised I-D" state and look forward to
a new version or a lively = email debate.

Thanks,
Adrian

---

I am confused = by whether you propose GTSM to be enabled by default.

Section 1 = says...
  GTSM specifies that it SHOULD NOT be enabled by = default in order to
  remain backward-compatible with the = unmodified protocol

Section 1.2 says...
  GTSM and = will require (statically or dynamically) disabling GTSM.
=   See Section 3.

Section 3 says...

=   The reason GTSM is enabled for Basic Discovery by = default

Indeed, 5082 says...

  3.  Use of = GTSM is OPTIONAL, and can be configured on a per-peer
=       (group) basis.

In fact, I = don't think GTSM is enabled by default in your document. I
think what = you have is that the desire to use GTSM (i.e., the
negotiation to use = it) is enabled by default in implementations of your
spec. But this = is subtly different from what the text = says.


Correct. Text = updated.

---

Can you tidy = the English in Section 1. Suggested...

OLD
  GTSM = specifies that it SHOULD NOT be enabled by default in order to
=   remain backward-compatible with the unmodified protocol; = this
  document specifies having a built-in dynamic GTSM = capability
  negotiation for LDP to suggest the use of = GTSM, provided GTSM is not
  enabled unless both peers can = detect each others' support for GTSM
  procedures and = agree on its usage as described in this document.
NEW
=   GTSM specifies that it should not be enabled by default; = this
  facilitates backward-compatibility with the = unmodified protocol. This
  document specifies a dynamic = negotiation for the an LDP peer to
  suggest the use of = GTSM.  GTSM will be used as specified in this
=   document provided both peers on an LDP session can detect = each
  others' support for GTSM and agree to use = it.
END


I updated the = text, slightly different "NEW" but hopefully tidied = up.

Note the change s/SHOULD = NOT/should not/. This text in Section 1 is not
defining any protocol = behavior and comes before the citation of RFC
2119. It doesn't need = to use upper case.


I agree = S1 is not defining protocol. However, the "SHOULD NOT" (capital) is = because it is sentence verbatim from RFC 5082 where it is defining = protocol. I made that more clear by enclosing in = quotes.

---

You need to = do some work to expand acronyms on first use if they are not
listed = with an asterisk at:

ht= tp://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc-style-guide/abbrev.expansion.txt

I = found:

LSR


I = thought I had done this. Seems that LSR escaped -- I do not see another = one. Fixed.

---

Is it = time to define an IANA registry for the common Hello parameters
bit = fields? Had one existed, you would not have needed to update 5036.
If = you create one now, future bit users will not have to update = your
RFC.

OK, let the = lively email debate begin here indeed!

We = thought it was time indeed. This is why we had taken the time to create = an I-D on "LDP IANA Considerations", and specify the Common Hello = Parameters bit field IANA registry at http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-iana-01#section-2.3. = We also took the extra time to comb through all of RFC 5036 and add = every missing one to this I-D, in hopes of preventing this issue in the = future for LDP.


So that is not a bit field, really, it is an opaque = semanticless reserved space.


---

Section 2.1

  The G = flag is meaingful only if T and R flags are set to 0 (which
=   must be the case for Basic Discovery), otherwise, the value = of G flag
  SHOULD be ignored on receipt.

This is = clear for the T flag: the use of GTSM is not supported for
targeted = (extended) Hellos.

Why is this the case for the R flag? The use = of the R flag is making a
request, not demanding use. It might be = the normal case that you would
not set the R flag unless you were = more than one hop away, but it does
not follow that this is the case, = does it? As indicated in RFC 5036, a
Hello receiver that does not = support targeted Hellos ignores the
request (i.e., the R flag). That = would clear it to support the G = flag.

Agreed. Removed the "and = R" flag.


---

Section = 2.1

  Any LSR not supporting GTSM for LDP, as defined = in this document,
  would continue to ignore the G flag, = independent of T and R flags'
  value, as per Section = 3.5.2 of [RFC5036].

I think you need to cover two cases. As it = happens the behavior you are
asking for is the same, but I think you = need to call out the two cases
separately:

1. An LSR that does = not recognise the G flag.
2. An LSR that does recognise the G flag = but does not support GTSM
  (either through = implementation or = configuration).


Sure. = Done, please check if the updated text covers this = adequately. 

---

Section 2.2

  Firstly, = LSRs using LDP Basic Discovery [RFC5036] send LDP Hello
=   messages to link-level multicast address (224.0.0.2 or = "all
  routers").  Such messages are never forwarded = beyond one hop and
  assumed to have their IP TTL or Hop = Count =3D 1.

This assumption is, I think, new in your document. I = can't find anything
about this in 5036 (although I may have missed = it).

I suspect you need to change this from an assumption to a = RECOMMENDation


OK. = Surprisingly (to me) I also did not find it in 5036 or 3036. Initially I = thought that was potentially outside this doc, but I agree with you. = Changed to "RECOMMENDED"

---

Section 2.2

  An LSR = that is capable of applying GTSM procedures to the subsequent
=   TCP/LDP peering session MUST set the G flag (for GTSM) to 1 = in Common
  Hello Parameter TLV in the LDP Link Hello = message [RFC5036].

"capable" is such an interesting word = :-)
And the text here is interesting. Does this cut into the = discussion of
defaults above? What you are saying is that a device = that has been coded
to support GTSM has to negotiate its use = regardless of operator
preferences. = Why?

No, "capable and willing" = :-)


How would the following = look?

  Unless configured otherwise, an LSR that = supports GTSM sets the G
  flag (for GTSM) to 1 in Common = Hello Parameter TLV in the LDP Link
  Hello message = [RFC5036].


OK, I took this = as a baseline and slightly updated it.

---

Section 2.2

  An LSR, = upon receiving an LDP Link Hello message, would recognize the
=   presence of G flag (in Common Hello Parameter TLV) only if = it
  supports GTSM for LDP, as specified in this = document.

This is not true :-(
You are updating 5036 so all = new implementations will recognise the G
flag whether or not they = support GTSM.


Agree. See = below.


---

Section 2.2

  If an = LSR
  recognizes the presence of G flag with the value =3D1 = in the received
  LDP Link Hello message, then it MUST = enforce GTSM for LDP in the
  subsequent TCP/LDP peering = session with the neighbor that sent the
  Hello message, = as specified in Section 2.3 of this document.

Again, this does = not offer the operator any control or choice in the
matter. Why is = the use of GTSM not = configurable?


Agree. Text = updated to address the two comments..

---

Section 2.2

  If an LSR = that has sent the LDP Link Hello with G flag =3D 1, then the
=   LSR MUST set IP TTL or Hop Count =3D 255 in the forthcoming = TCP
  Transport Connection(s) with that neighbor (e.g., = LSR2).  Please see
  Section 2.3 for more details = about the TCP transport connection
  specifics.

Why = is this MUST? What if the peer has responded with G=3D0 indicating = it
doesn't support (or want to use) GTSM? Surely, in that case, the = local
LSR can set any = TTL.

Yes...

=

BTW Why is this paragraph in Section = 2.2?

... and in fact this is = the first para of S2.3.


---

I think the mentions of "LSR2" in = sections 2.2 and 2.3 are a little =
unnecessary.


I agree. = I think they are there for extra clarity, and do not hurt, but can be = removed.

---

Are we = missing a discussion of what happens if the value of G changes on
a = subsequent Hello?


Perhaps, = but that negative testing is also not defined for the T and R bits of = RFC 5036 (that I could see). However it is implied from the = procedures.

---

Section = 3

Typo

s/en the third case/In the third = case/

Thanks = :-)


---

Section = 5

Suppose I touch the setting of the G flag in = transit?

That means that LDP Hello security is more important, = right?

In that case you would = not be off-link. 

"This = document increases the security for LDP, making it more resilient to = off-link attacks."

I think this spec states its = scope clearly, and if you touch the G flag on-link, we have worst = problems.

Is that oversimplifying or do you see = something blatantly missing from the Security = Considerations?


---

Section 5

Shouldn't you make = reference to the security section of 5082. In
particular, you need = to highlight the things GTSM does not protect =
against.


We could cite = the Security Considerations of RFC 5082. However, the Security = Considerations of RFC 5082 is about half of RFC 5082. This is partly = because it deals with the most generic cases of GTSM including Tunnels, = multi-hop, etc. I think that it is a bit implied, but explicit security = sounds better than implicit.

---

I believe your document should give = stronger hints than the generic
comments in 5082 about what should be = done with an LDP message that
"fails" a GTSM TTL check. This is = appropriate because you are writing
a protocol-specific application = of GTSM.


We basically = point to Section 3 of RFC 5082 for this, which = says:

         +  Dangerous: these are =
packets that have been identified as
            belonging to one of the GTSM-enabled sessions, but their TTL
            values are NOT within the expected range, and hence GTSM
            believes there is a risk that these packets have been
            spoofed.
...
         +  MAY drop packets =
classified as Dangerous.


So we purposely did = not want to force a policy to drop. This is something that, during the = writing of RFC 5082, was explicitly = requested.

Do you feel we should have a more = prescriptive guideance (not using the "P" (policy) word)? Which way do = you think should hint more strongly?

Adrian, = many thanks again for your review, it greatly improves the = document!!!

-- Carlos.

_______________________________________________
mpls= mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/ma= ilman/listinfo/mpls


= --Apple-Mail=_87B30E16-125E-4191-94F1-1B0A906B9BAB-- --Apple-Mail=_1606C275-5BAB-4765-8F59-E84A9F1D0781 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----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin) iEYEARECAAYFAk+xwZAACgkQtfDPGTp3USyeSgCeIeuBB098dfjEOY6sV17bPUc+ FYMAoK6fVR5A7WGDkaldya/JmEo0W/vy =QGXR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_1606C275-5BAB-4765-8F59-E84A9F1D0781-- From internet-drafts@ietf.org Mon May 14 19:44:05 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75E1C21F8864; Mon, 14 May 2012 19:44:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.531 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.531 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.068, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xxczEwcAeHlj; Mon, 14 May 2012 19:44:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DFC721F884C; Mon, 14 May 2012 19:44:05 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.02 Message-ID: <20120515024405.25251.11290.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 19:44:05 -0700 Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm-06.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 02:44:05 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working= Group of the IETF. Title : The Generalized TTL Security Mechanism (GTSM) for Label = Distribution Protocol (LDP) Author(s) : Carlos Pignataro Rajiv Asati Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm-06.txt Pages : 9 Date : 2012-05-14 The Generalized TTL Security Mechanism (GTSM) describes a generalized use of a packets Time to Live (TTL) (IPv4) or Hop Limit (IPv6) to verify that the packet was sourced by a node on a connected link, thereby protecting the router's IP control-plane from CPU utilization based attacks. This technique improves security and is used by many protocols. This document defines the GTSM use for the Label Distribution Protocol (LDP). This specification uses a bit reserved in RFC 5036 and therefore updates RFC 5036. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm-06.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm-06.txt The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm/ From adrian@olddog.co.uk Tue May 15 01:57:38 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A9B921F846A for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 01:57:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.522 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.522 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.077, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id y-OKlhAbAmqk for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 01:57:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp5.iomartmail.com (asmtp5.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.176]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB20D21F8460 for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 01:57:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp5.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp5.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q4F8vX3e007758; Tue, 15 May 2012 09:57:33 +0100 Received: from 950129200 (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp5.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q4F8vV7U007745 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 15 May 2012 09:57:32 +0100 From: "Adrian Farrel" To: "'Carlos Pignataro'" References: <074201cd26cf$b9992680$2ccb7380$@olddog.co.uk> <33D1C6A0-AC48-4135-8E97-95B1AD619206@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <33D1C6A0-AC48-4135-8E97-95B1AD619206@cisco.com> Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 09:57:31 +0100 Message-ID: <04ba01cd3278$c3d82880$4b887980$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQJMHQQXltKJk66xiapSTGbSgX85WQMF3WoclbSD5qA= Content-Language: en-gb Cc: mpls@ietf.org, draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm@tools.ietf.org, mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] AD review of draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 08:57:38 -0000 Hi Carlos, Cutting down to just the IANA issue >> Is it time to define an IANA registry for the common Hello parameters >> bit fields? Had one existed, you would not have needed to update = 5036. >> If you create one now, future bit users will not have to update your >> RFC. > > OK, let the lively email debate begin here indeed! > > We thought it was time indeed. This is why we had taken the time > to create an I-D on "LDP IANA Considerations", and specify the > Common Hello Parameters bit field IANA registry at=A0 > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-iana-01#section-2.3. > We also took the extra time to comb through all of RFC 5036 and > add every missing one to this I-D, in hopes of preventing this issue > in the future for LDP. > > However, Adrian Farrel observed that=20 > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mpls/current/msg07321.html Who he? You don't want to pay any attention to what he says. > So that is not a bit field, really, it is an opaque semanticless > reserved space. You're right. To be slightly fair, in that email, the mysterious author did offer the = option of updating 5036 to change the reserved fields into bit fields. The main = thrust of the mail was that you cannot use IANA to police a reserved field. But anyway, I withdraw the comment :-) And thanks for all your work onthe text. I will issue the IETF last = call. Adrian From cpignata@cisco.com Tue May 15 03:57:12 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B1CF21F8750 for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 03:57:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -108.531 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-108.531 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=2.067, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eECT0LOLf6gw for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 03:57:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.86.76]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B501521F8744 for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 03:57:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=cpignata@cisco.com; l=2250; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1337079431; x=1338289031; h=subject:references:content-transfer-encoding:from: in-reply-to:message-id:date:to:cc:mime-version; bh=zdwD4DP9IPZ0xdGeNLWXNknxhuwioKcOk/Ml/QxrH0I=; b=VOwxJXD2nQJpZ8OC+5fODwbs3W2ri6UapnYuMb8LfqdSUPtql9CFcqlB XaEmA85/8E71Vgj9I7dss/BPGu5vtTJs9qpaB0wpfP5BQv/opPnuCY/Fq xSlzO6VrO5xQIK4r46FsQtLhRQBElnXg4rDKl5QMtI8/CqM99FlfyjTSQ U=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhYIANk1sk+tJV2Z/2dsb2JhbABEhXusZ4ERAoEHghUBAQEDARIBEBFFBQsCAQgaAiYCAgJVAQEEEwkZh2cFC5pzjRaSd4EwiWwZgkGCDjVjBJV9gRGNRoFpgwWBQw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,593,1330905600"; d="scan'208";a="83336145" Received: from rcdn-core-2.cisco.com ([173.37.93.153]) by rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 15 May 2012 10:57:11 +0000 Received: from xbh-rcd-302.cisco.com (xbh-rcd-302.cisco.com [72.163.63.9]) by rcdn-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q4FAvBrl020442; Tue, 15 May 2012 10:57:11 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-206.cisco.com ([72.163.62.213]) by xbh-rcd-302.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 15 May 2012 05:57:11 -0500 Received: from 72.163.62.213 ([72.163.62.213]) by XMB-RCD-206.cisco.com ([72.163.62.213]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Tue, 15 May 2012 10:57:10 +0000 References: <074201cd26cf$b9992680$2ccb7380$@olddog.co.uk> <33D1C6A0-AC48-4135-8E97-95B1AD619206@cisco.com> <04ba01cd3278$c3d82880$4b887980$@olddog.co.uk> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 From: "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" thread-topic: [mpls] AD review of draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm thread-index: Ac0yiXn84IVaNq4jSESr/eGqTdS2yg== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" In-Reply-To: <04ba01cd3278$c3d82880$4b887980$@olddog.co.uk> Message-ID: <51C7DF46-FF14-441A-9129-8BFE65FAD5BF@cisco.com> Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 06:57:07 -0400 To: MIME-Version: 1.0 (1.0) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 May 2012 10:57:11.0179 (UTC) FILETIME=[7A902DB0:01CD3289] Cc: mpls@ietf.org, draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm@tools.ietf.org, mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] AD review of draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 10:57:12 -0000 VGhhbmsgeW91LCBBZHJpYW4hDQoNClRodW1iIHR5cGVkIGJ5IENhcmxvcyBQaWduYXRhcm8uDQpF eGN1emUgdHlwb2ZyYXBoaWNhayBlcnJvd3MNCg0KT24gTWF5IDE1LCAyMDEyLCBhdCA0OjU3IEFN LCAiQWRyaWFuIEZhcnJlbCIgPGFkcmlhbkBvbGRkb2cuY28udWs+IHdyb3RlOg0KDQo+IEhpIENh cmxvcywNCj4gDQo+IEN1dHRpbmcgZG93biB0byBqdXN0IHRoZSBJQU5BIGlzc3VlDQo+IA0KPj4+ IElzIGl0IHRpbWUgdG8gZGVmaW5lIGFuIElBTkEgcmVnaXN0cnkgZm9yIHRoZSBjb21tb24gSGVs bG8gcGFyYW1ldGVycw0KPj4+IGJpdCBmaWVsZHM/IEhhZCBvbmUgZXhpc3RlZCwgeW91IHdvdWxk IG5vdCBoYXZlIG5lZWRlZCB0byB1cGRhdGUgNTAzNi4NCj4+PiBJZiB5b3UgY3JlYXRlIG9uZSBu b3csIGZ1dHVyZSBiaXQgdXNlcnMgd2lsbCBub3QgaGF2ZSB0byB1cGRhdGUgeW91cg0KPj4+IFJG Qy4NCj4+IA0KPj4gT0ssIGxldCB0aGUgbGl2ZWx5IGVtYWlsIGRlYmF0ZSBiZWdpbiBoZXJlIGlu ZGVlZCENCj4+IA0KPj4gV2UgdGhvdWdodCBpdCB3YXMgdGltZSBpbmRlZWQuIFRoaXMgaXMgd2h5 IHdlIGhhZCB0YWtlbiB0aGUgdGltZQ0KPj4gdG8gY3JlYXRlIGFuIEktRCBvbiAiTERQIElBTkEg Q29uc2lkZXJhdGlvbnMiLCBhbmQgc3BlY2lmeSB0aGUNCj4+IENvbW1vbiBIZWxsbyBQYXJhbWV0 ZXJzIGJpdCBmaWVsZCBJQU5BIHJlZ2lzdHJ5IGF0w4IgDQo+PiBodHRwOi8vdG9vbHMuaWV0Zi5v cmcvaHRtbC9kcmFmdC1pZXRmLW1wbHMtbGRwLWlhbmEtMDEjc2VjdGlvbi0yLjMuDQo+PiBXZSBh bHNvIHRvb2sgdGhlIGV4dHJhIHRpbWUgdG8gY29tYiB0aHJvdWdoIGFsbCBvZiBSRkMgNTAzNiBh bmQNCj4+IGFkZCBldmVyeSBtaXNzaW5nIG9uZSB0byB0aGlzIEktRCwgaW4gaG9wZXMgb2YgcHJl dmVudGluZyB0aGlzIGlzc3VlDQo+PiBpbiB0aGUgZnV0dXJlIGZvciBMRFAuDQo+PiANCj4+IEhv d2V2ZXIsIEFkcmlhbiBGYXJyZWwgb2JzZXJ2ZWQgdGhhdCANCj4+IGh0dHA6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5v cmcvbWFpbC1hcmNoaXZlL3dlYi9tcGxzL2N1cnJlbnQvbXNnMDczMjEuaHRtbA0KPiANCj4gV2hv IGhlPyBZb3UgZG9uJ3Qgd2FudCB0byBwYXkgYW55IGF0dGVudGlvbiB0byB3aGF0IGhlIHNheXMu DQo+IA0KPj4gU28gdGhhdCBpcyBub3QgYSBiaXQgZmllbGQsIHJlYWxseSwgaXQgaXMgYW4gb3Bh cXVlIHNlbWFudGljbGVzcw0KPj4gcmVzZXJ2ZWQgc3BhY2UuDQo+IA0KPiBZb3UncmUgcmlnaHQu DQo+IFRvIGJlIHNsaWdodGx5IGZhaXIsIGluIHRoYXQgZW1haWwsIHRoZSBteXN0ZXJpb3VzIGF1 dGhvciBkaWQgb2ZmZXIgdGhlIG9wdGlvbg0KPiBvZiB1cGRhdGluZyA1MDM2IHRvIGNoYW5nZSB0 aGUgcmVzZXJ2ZWQgZmllbGRzIGludG8gYml0IGZpZWxkcy4gVGhlIG1haW4gdGhydXN0DQo+IG9m IHRoZSBtYWlsIHdhcyB0aGF0IHlvdSBjYW5ub3QgdXNlIElBTkEgdG8gcG9saWNlIGEgcmVzZXJ2 ZWQgZmllbGQuDQo+IA0KPiBCdXQgYW55d2F5LCBJIHdpdGhkcmF3IHRoZSBjb21tZW50IDotKQ0K PiANCj4gQW5kIHRoYW5rcyBmb3IgYWxsIHlvdXIgd29yayBvbnRoZSB0ZXh0LiBJIHdpbGwgaXNz dWUgdGhlIElFVEYgbGFzdCBjYWxsLg0KPiANCj4gQWRyaWFuDQo+IA0KPiANCg== From iesg-secretary@ietf.org Tue May 15 06:20:30 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5075E21F89B8; Tue, 15 May 2012 06:20:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.551 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.048, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sWta3t4yiiDv; Tue, 15 May 2012 06:20:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EF1E21F89B5; Tue, 15 May 2012 06:20:28 -0700 (PDT) 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: 4.02 Message-ID: <20120515132027.8942.41571.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 06:20:27 -0700 Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] Last Call: (The Generalized TTL Security Mechanism (GTSM) for Label Distribution Protocol (LDP)) to Proposed Standard X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 13:20:31 -0000 The IESG has received a request from the Multiprotocol Label Switching WG (mpls) to consider the following document: - 'The Generalized TTL Security Mechanism (GTSM) for Label Distribution Protocol (LDP)' as Proposed Standard The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2012-05-29. Exceptionally, comments may be sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. Abstract The Generalized TTL Security Mechanism (GTSM) describes a generalized use of a packets Time to Live (TTL) (IPv4) or Hop Limit (IPv6) to verify that the packet was sourced by a node on a connected link, thereby protecting the router's IP control-plane from CPU utilization based attacks. This technique improves security and is used by many protocols. This document defines the GTSM use for the Label Distribution Protocol (LDP). This specification uses a bit reserved in RFC 5036 and therefore updates RFC 5036. The file can be obtained via http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm/ IESG discussion can be tracked via http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm/ballot/ No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D. From lmishra.ietf@yahoo.ca Tue May 15 23:31:57 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 914EF21F87C9 for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 23:31:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.65 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.65 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.448, BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_210=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_25=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qNiBfp-4D3fn for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 23:31:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm27-vm0.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com (nm27-vm0.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com [98.138.91.63]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id DFD8821F8799 for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 23:31:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [98.138.90.51] by nm27.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 16 May 2012 06:31:53 -0000 Received: from [98.138.89.162] by tm4.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 16 May 2012 06:31:53 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1018.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 16 May 2012 06:31:53 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 47889.21080.bm@omp1018.mail.ne1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 37214 invoked by uid 60001); 16 May 2012 06:31:52 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.ca; s=s1024; t=1337149912; bh=4Yaed8r+81fnfSuStxs69Djx7RU1ICdLS6lcFWdaLX4=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=I9E6SOXUbqQUE9vUkcqC3Nl/kJk3ELy406nduBGU2mKiq8sSWXP4aJx3Z06YBE8HEpxcf/dTWTKktjF0tsrvEqgnlpsQDN0H4FGCFp6pftN9iLEormfqeLf30GJcKrH+aXvLra9oQD+zPAI0Ew3bRJZsrl6Z25vhiwOhkM+yilA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.ca; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=mP0w925enh4rTkpOylegC54UL85YfcLRdEzg3RTfL3Lp/FuOUoznbcwFrqEczXmu9En8NRppGB25oFpIsfPCCOTVgnV/MS/M4j/8f3+hHsrwfeEHFuB4tXEIENAk5b1gmRw/BjJIgomwKTFMCNoO2pg0OmthONxkG2yPRxZLvVQ=; X-YMail-OSG: XnNOe04VM1nf5kHE8pKfLnUCSyQI5YzakCr0dZUG1ziGnT6 5298an66BCc8uZsxG42twgWDpcmFwwPDuwY8DpSHGDUFOnEAfmcJL8nskUnm q0Ze8SAegOrudHZUhJX.izB8DkZtz61gn50MlT9z9xa7LggTT5i1IhjltF_Y 3ckxlUmhcovCEflGFANu9vFKqrm70ctck5lXQlm6lrGDOxHiR8ukVd5Xu9ff ltaYaOMmcEfRqrkIRC8kxlj77dt7v1gIEo.9nD4h7umYGIGTm5z7HcGfdIAn zF9PZTmfd1ceasENZYXAAMqExV1YXBIk42xdNDtPwIqo.q14XmNZiOxuFWdq tevJXeplgh9qc80nn04VkLoAj3596v6rtvygUis8jsgtYx2Crtsz2lhMFR9Y 0kex00w-- Received: from [122.167.15.177] by web121501.mail.ne1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 15 May 2012 23:31:52 PDT X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.118.349524 Message-ID: <1337149912.36314.YahooMailNeo@web121501.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 23:31:52 -0700 (PDT) From: Lingaraj Mishra To: "mpls@ietf.org" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="1389141485-44853586-1337149912=:36314" Subject: [mpls] draft-ietf-mpls-tp-ring-protection X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Lingaraj Mishra List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 06:31:57 -0000 --1389141485-44853586-1337149912=:36314 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello MPLS-TP Protection Authors,=0A=A0=0AI have been following RFC6378 and= draft-ietf-mpls-tp-ring-protection for some time.=0A=A0=0AI have some ques= tions regarding same:=0A=A0=0A1 - The RFC6378 does not discuss anything abo= ut topology of LINEAR protection i.e 1:n. It does not have clear topologica= l diagrams which it should inherit from SDH protection or T-MPLS protection= . If we follow T-MPLS which is REJECTED now, it should discuss SNC and Trai= l protection mechanisms. The packet networks are not really contained insid= e LINEAR topology. The most common topology, I would recon is mesh or MESS = e.g not sure. The TRANSPORT workd protection linear mechanisms really fall = back to 1:n in realistic scenarios for bandwidth contingency. =0A=A0=0A2 - = What are the values of WTR and hold-off timer? This values are normally con= stant in TRANSPORT world. The hold-on and hold-off values are are defined b= y G.707 or GR-253 for same. Are there any standard values for MPLS based de= fects?=0A3 - Why value of PT(Protection Type) is already fixed(RFC6378) ? A= re we planning again new format for RING topology? The RING topology in TRA= NSPORT world is always 1+1 and Bi-directional.=0A4 - There is no such provi= sion for ET(Extra Traffic) in case of 1:1 scenario. I think we can include = same here not to under-utilize protection PATH.=0A=0A5=A0 - MPLS-TP slide p= ackage published by JWT in June,2008 recommends to use native MPLS protecti= on mechanisms i.e. facility-bypass and de-tour till MPLS-TP ring protection= is ready. Is it fine?=0A=0AI also have some comment on name "Applicability= of LINEAR protection in RING topologies".=0A=0A6 - In steering protection,= are end points pre-provisioned?=0A=0APlease let me know your opinion on ab= ove.=0AWe are kind of planning to implement MPLS-TP v1.0 and above will imp= rovise our design.=0A=0ARegards,=0ALingaraj --1389141485-44853586-1337149912=:36314 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello MPLS-TP Pr= otection Authors,
 
I have been following RFC6378 = and draft-ietf-mpls-tp-ring-protection for some time.
 
I have some questions regarding same:
 
1 - = The RFC6378 does not discuss anything about topology of LINEAR protection i= .e 1:n. It does not have clear topological diagrams which it should inherit= from SDH protection or T-MPLS protection. If we follow T-MPLS which is REJ= ECTED now, it should discuss SNC and Trail protection mechanisms. The packe= t networks are not really contained inside LINEAR topology. The most common= topology, I would recon is mesh or MESS e.g not sure. The TRANSPORT workd = protection linear mechanisms really fall back to 1:n in realistic scenarios= for bandwidth contingency.
 
2 - What are the values of WTR and hold-off timer? This values are normally constant in= TRANSPORT world. The hold-on and hold-off values are are defined by G.707 = or GR-253 for same. Are there any standard values for MPLS based defects?
3 - Why value of PT(Protection Type) is already fixed(= RFC6378) ? Are we planning again new format for RING topology? The RING top= ology in TRANSPORT world is always 1+1 and Bi-directional.
4 - There is no such provision for ET(Extra Traffic) in case of 1:1 s= cenario. I think we can include same here not to under-utilize protection P= ATH.
 
5  - MPLS-TP slide package published b= y JWT in June,2008 recommends to use native MPLS protection mechanisms i.e.= facility-bypass and de-tour till MPLS-TP ring protection is ready. Is it f= ine?
 
I also have some comment on name "Applicabi= lity of LINEAR protection in RING topologies".
 
6 - In steering protection, are en= d points pre-provisioned?
 
Please let me know you= r opinion on above.
We are kind of planning to implement MPLS-TP = v1.0 and above will improvise our design.
 
Regard= s,
Lingaraj
--1389141485-44853586-1337149912=:36314-- From wyaacov@gmail.com Wed May 16 02:17:00 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87EE421F87CA for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 02:17:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.498 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.498 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.700, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_210=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_25=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_32=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id U1uJoqn5D53O for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 02:16:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qc0-f172.google.com (mail-qc0-f172.google.com [209.85.216.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 466DE21F877D for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 02:16:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: by qcsq13 with SMTP id q13so348935qcs.31 for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 02:16:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=uxmlIiMGAlPrqiUbMSnXuSX1bPVXvle7xAvSr5qQltg=; b=C2QIbJif6apVW/bwsZ2XJbfpL6T8M2/tjbH0+rAvlL/IH4zdIneJbCS0jv0X4bS3Kf 40Qjtqdw4tNySkSHxkTw/9qOddtIiYIwOcLILpYKcU0cy8/+0/TbdQSjcq5VDomSjghB tZaIDM7xlt417uM7lLxPjtGkowvNirxe77HjxHzycKqLqNo042be+p2i8wMYu74XtYoz oo2lsWwYkdzAGZaC/b8m36dnpZY+7VKhFPco5fzYkX/QhQu6y6nU7m1fgEhJC6lITYII Hr5jMUEp7Kjk05pY1Dt1qVlIGqfHEE9Bbv9T88iEIHSUjjIEUh6NZBGU94aUO7Tw69EG cUAw== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.224.209.4 with SMTP id ge4mr8770258qab.12.1337159815619; Wed, 16 May 2012 02:16:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.150.13 with HTTP; Wed, 16 May 2012 02:16:55 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1337149912.36314.YahooMailNeo@web121501.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1337149912.36314.YahooMailNeo@web121501.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 12:16:55 +0300 Message-ID: From: Yaacov Weingarten To: Lingaraj Mishra Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf300fab73d1647e04c023c77e Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] draft-ietf-mpls-tp-ring-protection X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 09:17:00 -0000 --20cf300fab73d1647e04c023c77e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Lingaraj, hi Thank you for your comments. I will try to address some of the issues that you raise, and will try (with your assistance) to clarify some of your other points. See below. Best regards, yaacov On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 9:31 AM, Lingaraj Mishra wrote: > Hello MPLS-TP Protection Authors, > > I have been following RFC6378 and draft-ietf-mpls-tp-ring-protection for > some time. > > I have some questions regarding same: > > 1 - The RFC6378 does not discuss anything about topology of LINEAR > protection i.e 1:n. It does not have clear topological diagrams which it > should inherit from SDH protection or T-MPLS protection. If we follow > T-MPLS which is REJECTED now, it should discuss SNC and Trail protection > mechanisms. The packet networks are not really contained inside LINEAR > topology. The most common topology, I would recon is mesh or MESS e.g not > sure. The TRANSPORT workd protection linear mechanisms really fall back to > 1:n in realistic scenarios for bandwidth contingency. > yw> Not sure that I fully understand what you are saying here - what topology are you looking for beyond that given in Figure 3 and the explanation given in the Survivability Framework (RFC6372) and section 1.1 of the document. Regarding mesh protection and 1:n protection there are additional drafts that address these and propose extensions or modifications of the basic PSC protocol. > 2 - What are the values of WTR and hold-off timer? This values are > normally constant in TRANSPORT world. The hold-on and hold-off values are > are defined by G.707 or GR-253 for same. Are there any standard values for > MPLS based defects? > yw> The protocol definition does not provide values for the timers, as a result of discussions that we had in the WG. These should either appear in the MIB definition or possibly in an ITU document that references the RFC. > 3 - Why value of PT(Protection Type) is already fixed(RFC6378) ? Are we > planning again new format for RING topology? The RING topology in TRANSPORT > world is always 1+1 and Bi-directional. > yw>Do not understand the connection between the PT field (that just identifies the difference between 1:1/1+1 or uni|bi directional) and the different topologies. As to your generalization of rings "always being 1+1" in the transport world, I can attest that G.8032 (ERP) is not 1+1 protection in a transport environment. > 4 - There is no such provision for ET(Extra Traffic) in case of 1:1 > scenario. I think we can include same here not to under-utilize protection > PATH. > yw> According to RFC5654 (TP Reqs) - extra traffic is frowned upon in transport networks, and therefore it is not explicitly addressed, however, the understanding is that this would be pre-empted whenever the protection path is trigerred for a switch. > > 5 - MPLS-TP slide package published by JWT in June,2008 recommends to use > native MPLS protection mechanisms i.e. facility-bypass and de-tour till > MPLS-TP ring protection is ready. Is it fine? > yw> Yes, most certainly. The ring protection draft is wirtten for operators that prefer to use a data-plane protocol for performing protection and demonstrates how PSC could be used to perform this switchover. > > I also have some comment on name "Applicability of LINEAR protection in > RING topologies". > yw> what is your comment? > > 6 - In steering protection, are end points pre-provisioned? > yw> could you be specific about what provisioning you are referring to > > Please let me know your opinion on above. > We are kind of planning to implement MPLS-TP v1.0 and above will improvise > our design. > > Regards, > Lingaraj > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > --20cf300fab73d1647e04c023c77e Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lingaraj, hi

Thank you for your comment= s. =A0I will try to address some of the issues that you raise, and will try= (with your assistance) to clarify some of your other points. =A0See below.=

Best regards,
yaacov

On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 9:31 AM, Lingaraj Mishra <lmishra.ie= tf@yahoo.ca> wrote:
Hello MPLS-TP Protection Autho= rs,
=A0
I have been following RFC6378 and draft-ietf-mpls-tp-rin= g-protection for some time.
=A0
I have some questions r= egarding same:
=A0
1 - The RFC6378 does not discuss any= thing about topology of LINEAR protection i.e 1:n. It does not have clear t= opological diagrams which it should inherit from SDH protection or T-MPLS p= rotection. If we follow T-MPLS which is REJECTED now, it should discuss SNC= and Trail protection mechanisms. The packet networks are not really contai= ned inside LINEAR topology. The most common topology, I would recon is mesh= or MESS e.g not sure. The TRANSPORT workd protection linear mechanisms rea= lly fall back to 1:n in realistic scenarios for bandwidth contingency.

yw> Not sure that I fully u= nderstand what you are saying here - what topology are you looking for beyo= nd that given in Figure 3 and the explanation given in the Survivability Fr= amework (RFC6372) =A0and section 1.1 of the document. =A0Regarding mesh pro= tection and 1:n protection there are additional drafts that address these a= nd propose extensions or modifications of the basic PSC protocol.

=A0
2 - What are the values of WTR and hold-off timer? This values are normally constant in= TRANSPORT world. The hold-on and hold-off values are are defined by G.707 = or GR-253 for same. Are there any standard values for MPLS based defects?

yw> The protocol definition= does not provide values for the timers, as a result of discussions that we= had in the WG. =A0These should either appear in the MIB definition or poss= ibly in an ITU document that references the RFC.
=A0
3 - Why value of PT(Protection Type) is already fixed(RFC6= 378) ? Are we planning again new format for RING topology? The RING topolog= y in TRANSPORT world is always 1+1 and Bi-directional.

yw>Do not understand the connection bet= ween the PT field (that just identifies the difference between 1:1/1+1 or u= ni|bi directional) and the different topologies. =A0As to your generalizati= on of rings "always being 1+1" in the transport world, I can atte= st that G.8032 (ERP) is not 1+1 protection in a transport environment.
=A0
4 - There is no such provision for ET(Extra Traffic) in case of 1:1 sc= enario. I think we can include same here not to under-utilize protection PA= TH.

yw> According to R= FC5654 (TP Reqs) - extra traffic is frowned upon in transport networks, and= therefore it is not explicitly addressed, however, the understanding is th= at this would be pre-empted whenever the protection path is trigerred for a= switch.=A0
=A0
5=A0 - MPLS-TP s= lide package published by JWT in June,2008 recommends to use native MPLS pr= otection mechanisms i.e. facility-bypass and de-tour till MPLS-TP ring prot= ection is ready. Is it fine?

yw> Yes, most certainly. = =A0The ring protection draft is wirtten for operators that prefer to use a = data-plane protocol for performing protection and demonstrates how PSC coul= d be used to perform this switchover.=A0
=A0
I also have some comment on name "Applicability of = LINEAR protection in RING topologies".

yw>= what is your comment?=A0
=A0
6 - In steering protection, are end points pre-provision= ed?

yw> could you be s= pecific about what provisioning you are referring to=A0
=A0
Please let me know your opinion on above.
=
We are kind of planning to implement MPLS-TP v1.0 and above will impro= vise our design.
=A0
Regards,
Lingaraj

_______= ________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
ht= tps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls


--20cf300fab73d1647e04c023c77e-- From lucy.yong@huawei.com Wed May 16 07:41:54 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5430E21F8543 for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 07:41:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.507 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.507 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.091, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oZs1yNZbEhoh for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 07:41:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dfwrgout.huawei.com (dfwrgout.huawei.com [206.16.17.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B434621F8535 for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 07:41:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.9.243 (EHLO dfweml201-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.9.243]) by dfwrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.2.3-GA FastPath) with ESMTP id AGG09173; Wed, 16 May 2012 10:41:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from DFWEML408-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.134) by dfweml201-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.9.107) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Wed, 16 May 2012 07:39:18 -0700 Received: from DFWEML506-MBX.china.huawei.com ([10.124.31.111]) by dfweml408-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.134]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Wed, 16 May 2012 07:39:19 -0700 From: Lucy yong To: Ross Callon , "'mpls@ietf.org'" Thread-Topic: Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping Thread-Index: Ac0vgcJX70M9Do4pRz++u0vZUWYe/wD7+R9A Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 14:39:20 +0000 Message-ID: <2691CE0099834E4A9C5044EEC662BB9D331090A4@dfweml506-mbx> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.47.150.196] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_2691CE0099834E4A9C5044EEC662BB9D331090A4dfweml506mbx_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 14:41:54 -0000 --_000_2691CE0099834E4A9C5044EEC662BB9D331090A4dfweml506mbx_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Support! From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ros= s Callon Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 9:24 AM To: 'mpls@ietf.org' Subject: [mpls] Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping Working Group, This is to start a two week poll to see if there is support to adopt draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping as an mpls working group draft. Pleased send your comments to the mpls working group mailing list (mpls@iet= f.org). This poll ends at the end of the day May 25, 2012 Ross for the mpls wg chairs --_000_2691CE0099834E4A9C5044EEC662BB9D331090A4dfweml506mbx_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Support!

 <= /p>

From: mpls-bou= nces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ross Callon
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 9:24 AM
To: 'mpls@ietf.org'
Subject: [mpls] Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping<= /span>

 

Working Group,

 

This is to start a two week poll to see if there is support to adopt=

 

    draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping

 

as an mpls working group draft.

 

Pleased send your comments to the mpls working group mailing list (mpls@ietf.org).

 

This poll ends at the end of the day May 25, 2012

 

Ross

for the mpls wg chairs

 

--_000_2691CE0099834E4A9C5044EEC662BB9D331090A4dfweml506mbx_-- From eosborne@cisco.com Wed May 16 08:03:34 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1292B21F8528 for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 08:03:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -9.935 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.935 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.664, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xOZsqbZXlMvS for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 08:03:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.86.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7625421F853F for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 08:03:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=eosborne@cisco.com; l=682; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1337180613; x=1338390213; h=mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date: message-id:from:to; bh=gruuQk5gQIXXlclGtqaozJNpaneNsPbPC92UjPkQnV0=; b=CW/cJCqlj6mxnN8eVa1KapPA9hCY/FOF2GdwWenzqsQrQ2f50uae0JOJ v6q7C9fqdQH3p57C5VSx4bZHOtIwR6zzF58yh65uAUhCPdvRmgqPV/s7e UhOlu98TWZszeqLDim10mvhqVIQg+LFnqjpOGWADykUINbwsIgTWG/vHq g=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EAM/As0+tJXG9/2dsb2JhbABEtAuBB4IVAQEBBBIBHQo0FwYBCA4DBAEBCwYXAQdFCQkBBAESCBqHbJsqoBGLE4RzYgOIY5tugWmDBw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,603,1330905600"; d="scan'208";a="83565206" Received: from rcdn-core2-2.cisco.com ([173.37.113.189]) by rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 16 May 2012 15:03:29 +0000 Received: from xbh-rcd-202.cisco.com (xbh-rcd-202.cisco.com [72.163.62.201]) by rcdn-core2-2.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q4GF3TMa020787; Wed, 16 May 2012 15:03:29 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-202.cisco.com ([72.163.62.209]) by xbh-rcd-202.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 16 May 2012 10:03:29 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 10:03:27 -0500 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping Thread-Index: Ac0vgcJX70M9Do4pRz++u0vZUWYe/wD80dBA From: "Eric Osborne (eosborne)" To: "Ross Callon" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 May 2012 15:03:29.0711 (UTC) FILETIME=[0DAAF3F0:01CD3375] Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 15:03:34 -0000 Support. eric > -----Original Message----- > From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of > Ross Callon > Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 10:24 AM > To: 'mpls@ietf.org' > Subject: [mpls] Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping >=20 > Working Group, >=20 > This is to start a two week poll to see if there is support to adopt >=20 > draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping >=20 > as an mpls working group draft. >=20 > Pleased send your comments to the mpls working group mailing list > (mpls@ietf.org ). >=20 > This poll ends at the end of the day May 25, 2012 >=20 > Ross > for the mpls wg chairs >=20 From linda.dunbar@huawei.com Wed May 16 08:17:16 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDD9121F865E for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 08:17:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.234 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.234 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.365, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VYMsKkN6mLxd for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 08:17:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dfwrgout.huawei.com (dfwrgout.huawei.com [206.16.17.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 453B021F84E6 for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 08:17:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.9.243 (EHLO dfweml201-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.9.243]) by dfwrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.2.3-GA FastPath) with ESMTP id AFZ14560; Wed, 16 May 2012 11:17:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from DFWEML404-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.203) by dfweml201-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.9.107) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Wed, 16 May 2012 08:15:15 -0700 Received: from DFWEML506-MBX.china.huawei.com ([10.124.31.111]) by dfweml404-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.203]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Wed, 16 May 2012 08:15:14 -0700 From: Linda Dunbar To: Ross Callon , "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping Thread-Index: Ac0vgcJX70M9Do4pRz++u0vZUWYe/wD80dBAAABm7EA= Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 15:15:14 +0000 Message-ID: <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F6339332B7@dfweml506-mbx> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.192.11.156] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 15:17:17 -0000 Support,=20 Linda Dunbar > > -----Original Message----- > > From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf > Of > > Ross Callon > > Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 10:24 AM > > To: 'mpls@ietf.org' > > Subject: [mpls] Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping > > > > Working Group, > > > > This is to start a two week poll to see if there is support to adopt > > > > draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping > > > > as an mpls working group draft. > > > > Pleased send your comments to the mpls working group mailing list > > (mpls@ietf.org ). > > > > This poll ends at the end of the day May 25, 2012 > > > > Ross > > for the mpls wg chairs > > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From agmalis@gmail.com Wed May 16 08:22:59 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 539F821F85D5 for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 08:22:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.556 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.556 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.043, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RGZjeebc9SEa for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 08:22:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yw0-f44.google.com (mail-yw0-f44.google.com [209.85.213.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C3E221F853B for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 08:22:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by yhq56 with SMTP id 56so1017809yhq.31 for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 08:22:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=HkGx7U6XS55JMXZOn3j58M5OvecoUUYvxGDbUdrY0xE=; b=hhBmdzjYO9k7X5zAwtKtBM4u/24fefyLAZhEV0eRpPxISYTmgY4g0l0Wxr4WlbrMMD a+tRmE5rh4ZlSfLSRwihNby7yDQ2CDtACm0yuPgBXCr+VsFcjjsXCWjbAqoK7wiUNc1P B0GBNxZKPzold7dvk/PPkFgcknrt7cbWQWBukwYedN0pR9vu67pj7GI5HY+iV/QdZAex raxY/ch9Q614oqJROz2KGefS7kpwU7uj3m6ygU0BPtJxjRCYTiBNFPh5znomrW1+lnqi Ob+bXmTl4TOtDZBjVPilflfBhwiVe9wlEDWSK6LihD9MF8GNwT8b2wgI8+oKWOKFwb4e g5fA== Received: by 10.50.178.33 with SMTP id cv1mr2957279igc.1.1337181777233; Wed, 16 May 2012 08:22:57 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.50.184.231 with HTTP; Wed, 16 May 2012 08:22:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: "Andrew G. Malis" Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 11:22:36 -0400 Message-ID: To: Ross Callon Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 15:22:59 -0000 Support. Cheers, Andy On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Ross Callon wrote: > Working Group, > > This is to start a two week poll to see if there is support to adopt > > =A0=A0=A0 draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping > > as an mpls working group draft. > > Pleased send your comments to the mpls working group mailing list > (mpls@ietf.org). > > This poll ends at the end of the day May 25, 2012 > > Ross > for the mpls wg chairs > > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > From jeff.tantsura@ericsson.com Wed May 16 08:37:30 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49A9021F84FE for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 08:37:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.449 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id h1ZboBxQiZ6G for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 08:37:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imr3.ericy.com (imr3.ericy.com [198.24.6.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7F1821F84FB for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 08:37:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eusaamw0711.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.178]) by imr3.ericy.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q4GFbAdK006125 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Wed, 16 May 2012 10:37:28 -0500 Received: from EUSAACMS0701.eamcs.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.6]) by eusaamw0711.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.178]) with mapi; Wed, 16 May 2012 11:37:24 -0400 From: Jeff Tantsura To: Ross Callon Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 11:36:11 -0400 Thread-Topic: [mpls] Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping Thread-Index: Ac0zeco6bilxuTyHSseJYL/FItSeUg== Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 15:37:30 -0000 WWVzL3N1cHBvcnQNCg0KUmVnYXJkcywNCkplZmYNCg0KT24gTWF5IDExLCAyMDEyLCBhdCA0OjI2 IFBNLCAiUm9zcyBDYWxsb24iIDxyY2FsbG9uQGp1bmlwZXIubmV0PG1haWx0bzpyY2FsbG9uQGp1 bmlwZXIubmV0Pj4gd3JvdGU6DQoNCldvcmtpbmcgR3JvdXAsDQoNClRoaXMgaXMgdG8gc3RhcnQg YSB0d28gd2VlayBwb2xsIHRvIHNlZSBpZiB0aGVyZSBpcyBzdXBwb3J0IHRvIGFkb3B0DQoNCiAg ICBkcmFmdC1jaGVuLW1wbHMtaXB2Ni1wdy1sc3AtcGluZw0KDQphcyBhbiBtcGxzIHdvcmtpbmcg Z3JvdXAgZHJhZnQuDQoNClBsZWFzZWQgc2VuZCB5b3VyIGNvbW1lbnRzIHRvIHRoZSBtcGxzIHdv cmtpbmcgZ3JvdXAgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0IChtcGxzQGlldGYub3JnPG1haWx0bzptcGxzQGlldGYu b3JnPikuDQoNClRoaXMgcG9sbCBlbmRzIGF0IHRoZSBlbmQgb2YgdGhlIGRheSBNYXkgMjUsIDIw MTINCg0KUm9zcw0KZm9yIHRoZSBtcGxzIHdnIGNoYWlycw0KDQpfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXw0KbXBscyBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QNCm1wbHNAaWV0 Zi5vcmc8bWFpbHRvOm1wbHNAaWV0Zi5vcmc+DQpodHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFu L2xpc3RpbmZvL21wbHMNCg== From lmishra.ietf@yahoo.ca Wed May 16 09:50:11 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE7DA21F8669 for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 09:50:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.388 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.388 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.186, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_210=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_25=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_32=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nnAlT438IfQy for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 09:50:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm24-vm0.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com (nm24-vm0.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com [98.138.90.34]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 2D19221F84DD for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 09:50:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [98.138.90.52] by nm24.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 16 May 2012 16:50:06 -0000 Received: from [98.138.87.8] by tm5.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 16 May 2012 16:50:06 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1008.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 16 May 2012 16:50:05 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 991238.86681.bm@omp1008.mail.ne1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 30036 invoked by uid 60001); 16 May 2012 16:50:05 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.ca; s=s1024; t=1337187005; bh=IpxAVI73PHc4JR6i6QsXRKcJQBZztZxQoZRSxz7WVn8=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=XRT0ruODw/VEpmDXrwStCZLKULqGyq6OaGphu218OkDwFqccjOO3qafJIOXXgPw73P4lb0yGOL1IVOSVCy2Z52x2UYfXjcQ6nPcSOabEB6cxWigNTHcACeukiIr3MuU7Xy+xLBNRKD4uFsi/9kELCGLogHGsmNpkXLw0TH7h7iE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.ca; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=lSeATpLPg+Y+yFbgdUDW7yAqrw2i3fQYIV5zL9oieQICvKVZcGthh7sQiOVXv5w6kTydqZzwSK0KKREOyeLVs1i4HtqfFkL5538dedj9QtNZmXVKkF12Cb8Tqh3NhYx/yq4O2Bv+nkyDT9lSuyEXski8NBCTzxqZUaXWtaZ3ZHk=; X-YMail-OSG: r0fBDA8VM1kQzoWIgeDKe5LG3H7GHQaSosqwtqi4TqZiwgo zD72OTmYfWI9_G6J91atwjRxkZ0eUjOyMWZ7Zob.JyMvMn8TRr2d2_bCwbbl vu1ZwxWzPzdiifRzEhT5rIeU9UlPJXK4CFEShZ2TzG.jCBhl65TJkIVbZLeM Xs2yBOVqr.Xqt8I2Xaww0TUwy83TO6IcaJYbDK9vXlWF4keu9MHwr4tO0RW5 xeezYzO.42Diz_m6m5O0n6z.ScFmITIAUQsYCxtCLOoaF5KhPuaNVOTUNhW4 gaJ1JkVSqIcPIeNzYsOsoFymxNm35MtAzK0YcTcHorhToCWVRpwEGSJObGcW 7nAmh9NB2Qhbo3O1oek4EYYKvTUi5G1CM0xKMnuWsoIq0yzdLT6htiEPyDvm YYsooGUxs1upR2Jhmsr3PmEm88I20hdSPhsGJa0a3ZzJnMtBQ31LtrX6ColJ tFtU2Z3246BN.B_webTqvt9.7QoT3A_Xi4kYrJ86VISS.sp26HFNdPKPPK_0 CBwVa11g- Received: from [106.51.77.191] by web121503.mail.ne1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 16 May 2012 09:50:05 PDT X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.118.349524 References: <1337149912.36314.YahooMailNeo@web121501.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1337186906.83510.YahooMailNeo@web121504.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1337187005.16488.YahooMailNeo@web121503.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 09:50:05 -0700 (PDT) From: Lingaraj Mishra To: Yaacov Weingarten In-Reply-To: <1337186906.83510.YahooMailNeo@web121504.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="828875537-1932084988-1337187005=:16488" Cc: "\"mpls@ietf.org\"" Subject: Re: [mpls] draft-ietf-mpls-tp-ring-protection X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Lingaraj Mishra List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 16:50:11 -0000 --828875537-1932084988-1337187005=:16488 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi,=0A=A0=0AThank you for answers below.=0APlease find my gratitude and som= e extended questions inline.=0A=A0=0ARegards,=0ALingaraj=0A=0A=0A__________= ______________________=0A From: Yaacov Weingarten =0ATo:= Lingaraj Mishra =0ACc: "mpls@ietf.org" =0ASent: Wednesday, May 16, 2012 2:46:55 PM=0ASubject: Re: [mpls] draf= t-ietf-mpls-tp-ring-protection=0A =0A=0ALingaraj, hi=0A=0AThank you for yo= ur comments. =A0I will try to address some of the issues that you raise, an= d will try (with your assistance) to clarify some of your other points. =A0= See below. =0A=0ABest regards,=0Ayaacov=0A=0A=0AOn Wed, May 16, 2012 at 9:3= 1 AM, Lingaraj Mishra wrote:=0A=0AHello MPLS-TP Pro= tection Authors, =0A>=0A>I have been following RFC6378 and draft-ietf-mpls-= tp-ring-protection for some time.=0A>=0A>I have some questions regarding sa= me:=0A>=0A>1 - The RFC6378 does not discuss anything about topology of LINE= AR protection i.e 1:n. It does not have clear topological diagrams which it= should inherit from SDH protection or T-MPLS protection. If we follow T-MP= LS which is REJECTED now, it should discuss SNC and Trail protection mechan= isms. The packet networks are not really contained inside LINEAR topology. = The most common topology, I would recon is mesh or MESS e.g not sure. The T= RANSPORT workd protection linear mechanisms really fall back to 1:n in real= istic scenarios for bandwidth contingency. =0A=0Ayw> Not sure that I fully = understand what you are saying here - what topology are you looking for bey= ond that given in Figure 3 and the explanation given in the Survivability F= ramework (RFC6372) =A0and section 1.1 of the document. =A0Regarding mesh pr= otection and 1:n protection there are additional drafts that address these = and propose extensions or modifications of the basic PSC protocol. =0A=0A[l= mishra] In general, I was referring to diagram showing "how n working paths= are protected by 1 protection path". As I read RFC6372 in context of 1:n p= rotection, found below:=0ASection 4.7.1:=0AIn the general case of 1:n linea= r protection, one protection entity is allocated to protect n working entit= ies. "Here a diagram will be nice."=0A=0ASection 4.7.2:=0AA 1:n protection = scheme for P2MP transport paths is also required by=A0 [RFC5654].=A0 Such a= mechanism is for future study.=0A=0AAlso I=A0understand that=A0SONET/SDH b= ased networks always have fixed relationship like: 1:n (revertive) and 1+1(= non-revertive). Here in RFC6372, we are picking on bridging and switching= =A0mechanisms=A0differently.=A0=0A=A0=0A2 - What are the values of WTR and = hold-off timer? This values are normally constant in TRANSPORT world. The h= old-on and hold-off values are are defined by G.707 or GR-253 for same. Are= there any standard values for MPLS based defects? =0A=0Ayw> The protocol d= efinition does not provide values for the timers, as a result of discussion= s that we had in the WG. =A0These should either appear in the MIB definitio= n or possibly in an ITU document that references the RFC. =0A=0A[lmishra] T= hank you for=A0an exact answer.=A0=0A3 - Why value of PT(Protection Type) i= s already fixed(RFC6378) ? Are we planning again new format for RING topolo= gy? The RING topology in TRANSPORT world is always 1+1 and Bi-directional. = =0A=0Ayw>Do not understand the connection between the PT field (that just i= dentifies the difference between 1:1/1+1 or uni|bi directional) and the dif= ferent topologies. =A0As to your generalization of rings "always being 1+1"= in the transport world, I can attest that G.8032 (ERP) is not 1+1 protecti= on in a transport environment. =0A=0A[lmishra] I meant that "We have 2 bits= and 3 values already allocated". But, PSC channel type is going to serve t= o LINEAR, RING and MESH protection. Only one is done and two to go. What wi= lll we do for any new PT needed for those topologies?=0A =0A>4 - There is n= o such provision for ET(Extra Traffic) in case of 1:1 scenario. I think we = can include same here not to under-utilize protection PATH.=0A=0Ayw> Accord= ing to RFC5654 (TP Reqs) - extra traffic is frowned upon in transport netwo= rks, and therefore it is not explicitly addressed, however, the understandi= ng is that this would be pre-empted whenever the protection path is trigerr= ed for a switch.=A0=0A=0A[lmishra] Thank you. I got ref. section 4.3.3 RFC6= 372.=0A=0A>=0A>5=A0 - MPLS-TP slide package published by JWT in June,2008 r= ecommends to use native MPLS protection mechanisms i.e. facility-bypass and= de-tour till MPLS-TP ring protection is ready. Is it fine? =0A=0Ayw> Yes, = most certainly. =A0The ring protection draft is wirtten for operators that = prefer to use a data-plane protocol for performing protection and demonstra= tes how PSC could be used to perform this switchover.=A0=0A=0A=0AI also hav= e some comment on name "Applicability of LINEAR protection in RING topologi= es".=0A=0Ayw> what is your comment?=A0=0A=0A[lmishra] Why are we naming it = as LINEAR protection mechanisms are applied in RING topologies. These are n= ot exactly suitable. Even though they sound same as 1:1 or 1+1, it is compl= etely different. The most fundamental part is that every node in RING topol= ogy is topology aware and maintain node database as oppose to LINEAR topolo= gy. This is how it is done in optical networks i.e SONET/SDH.=0A=0A>=0A>6 -= In steering protection, are end points pre-provisioned?=0A=0Ayw> could you= be specific about what provisioning you are referring to=A0=0A=0A[lmishra]= How do you maintain information at ingress node where steering is done irr= espective of any segment failure among any intermediate adjacent=A0nodes be= tween ingress-to-egress ?=0A=0APlease let me know your opinion on above.=0A= >We are kind of planning to implement MPLS-TP v1.0 and above will improvise= our design. =0A>=0A>Regards,=0A>Lingaraj=0A>______________________________= _________________=0A>mpls mailing list=0A>mpls@ietf.org=0A>https://www.ietf= .org/mailman/listinfo/mpls=0A>=0A> --828875537-1932084988-1337187005=:16488 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,=
&nbs= p;
Thank you for answers below.
Plea= se find my gratitude and some extended questions inline.
<= span> 
Regards,
Lingaraj=
 
<= font size=3D"2" face=3D"Arial">
From: Yaacov Weingarten <wyaacov@gmail.com>
To: Lingaraj Mishra <lmishra.i= etf@yahoo.ca>
Cc: "= mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2012 2:46:55 PM
Subject: Re: [mpls] draft-ietf-mpls-tp-r= ing-protection

Lingaraj, hi

Thank you for your comments.  I w= ill try to address some of the issues that you raise, and will try (with yo= ur assistance) to clarify some of your other points.  See below.
= =0A=0A

Best regards,
yaacov

On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 9:31 AM, Lingaraj Mish= ra <lmishra.= ietf@yahoo.ca> wrote:
=0A=0A
Hello MPLS-TP Protection Authors,
=0A= =0A
 
I have been following RFC6378 and draft-ietf-mpls-= tp-ring-protection for some time.
 
I have some qu= estions regarding same:
 
1 - The RFC6378 does not= discuss anything about topology of LINEAR protection i.e 1:n. It does not = have clear topological diagrams which it should inherit from SDH protection= or T-MPLS protection. If we follow T-MPLS which is REJECTED now, it should= discuss SNC and Trail protection mechanisms. The packet networks are not r= eally contained inside LINEAR topology. The most common topology, I would r= econ is mesh or MESS e.g not sure. The TRANSPORT workd protection linear me= chanisms really fall back to 1:n in realistic scenarios for bandwidth conti= ngency.
=0A=0A

yw> Not = sure that I fully understand what you are saying here - what topology are y= ou looking for beyond that given in Figure 3 and the explanation given in t= he Survivability Framework (RFC6372)  and section 1.1 of the document.=  Regarding mesh protection and 1:n protection there are additional dr= afts that address these and propose extensions or modifications of the basi= c PSC protocol.
=0A
 
[lmishra] In general, I was r= eferring to diagram showing "how n working paths are protected by 1 protect= ion path". As I read RFC6372 in context of 1:n protection, found below:
Section 4.7.1:
In the general case of 1:n linear protectio= n, one protection entity is allocated to protect n working entities. "Here = a diagram will be nice."
 
Section 4.7.2:
A 1:n protection scheme for P2MP transport paths is also required by = ; [RFC5654].  Such a mechanism is for futur= e study.
 
Also I understand that SONET/= SDH based networks always have fixed relationship like: 1:n (revertive) and= 1+1(non-revertive). Here in RFC6372, we are picking on bridging and=0A swi= tching mechanisms differently. 
 
2 - What are=0A the value= s of WTR and hold-off timer? This values are normally constant in TRANSPORT= world. The hold-on and hold-off values are are defined by G.707 or GR-253 = for same. Are there any standard values for MPLS based defects?
=0A

yw> The protocol definition do= es not provide values for the timers, as a result of discussions that we ha= d in the WG.  These should either appear in the MIB definition or poss= ibly in an ITU document that references the RFC.
=0A
 
<= div>[lmishra] Thank you for an exact answer. 
=0A
3 - Why va= lue of PT(Protection Type) is already fixed(RFC6378) ? Are we planning agai= n new format for RING topology? The RING topology in TRANSPORT world is alw= ays 1+1 and Bi-directional.
=0A

yw>Do not understand the connection between the PT field (that jus= t identifies the difference between 1:1/1+1 or uni|bi directional) and the = different topologies.  As to your generalization of rings "always bein= g 1+1" in the transport world, I can attest that G.8032 (ERP) is not 1+1 pr= otection in a transport environment.
=0A
 
[lmishra= ] I meant that "We have 2 bits and 3 values already allocated". But, PSC ch= annel type is going to serve to LINEAR, RING and MESH protection. Only one = is done and two to go. What willl we do for any new PT needed for those top= ologies?
=0A
4 - There is no such provision for ET(Extra Traffic) in cas= e of 1:1 scenario. I think we can include same here not to under-utilize pr= otection PATH.

yw> Acc= ording to RFC5654 (TP Reqs) - extra traffic is frowned upon in transport ne= tworks, and therefore it is not explicitly addressed, however, the understa= nding is that this would be pre-empted whenever the protection path is trig= erred for a switch. 
 
[lmishra] Thank you. I= got ref. section 4.3.3 RFC6372.
 
5  - MPLS-TP slide package p= ublished by JWT in June,2008 recommends to use native MPLS protection mecha= nisms i.e.=0A facility-bypass and de-tour till MPLS-TP ring protection is r= eady. Is it fine?
=0A

yw&g= t; Yes, most certainly.  The ring protection draft is wirtten for oper= ators that prefer to use a data-plane protocol for performing protection an= d demonstrates how PSC could be used to perform this switchover. 
 
 
I also have some comment on name "Applicability of LI= NEAR protection in RING=0A topologies".
=
yw> what is your comment? 
 
[lmishra] Why are we naming it as LINEAR protection mechanisms are applie= d in RING topologies. These are not exactly suitable. Even though they soun= d same as 1:1 or 1+1, it is completely different. The most fundamental part= is that every node in RING topology is topology aware and maintain node da= tabase as oppose to LINEAR topology. This is how it is done in optical netw= orks i.e SONET/SDH.
=0A
 
6 - In steering protection, are end points = pre-provisioned?

yw> c= ould you be specific about what provisioning you are referring to 
 
[lmishra] How do you maintain information at ingres= s node where steering is done irrespective of any segment failure among any= intermediate adjacent nodes between ingress-to-egress ?
&nb= sp;
Plea= se let me know your opinion on above.
We are kind of planning to = implement MPLS-TP v1.0 and above will improvise our design.
=0A=0A 
Regards,
Lingaraj

________= _______________________________________
=0Ampls mailing list
=0Ampls@ietf.org
=0Ahttps://www.iet= f.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
=0A

=0A



<= /html> --828875537-1932084988-1337187005=:16488-- From aldrin.ietf@gmail.com Wed May 16 13:07:58 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D450C21F8616 for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 13:07:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.679 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.679 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.477, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id glYlucNlhOHt for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 13:07:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pb0-f44.google.com (mail-pb0-f44.google.com [209.85.160.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AAC721F85B5 for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 13:07:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pbcwy7 with SMTP id wy7so1597546pbc.31 for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 13:07:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:message-id:cc:x-mailer:from:subject:date:to; bh=ujRMlJUEhzjiLTuphS/rRyWGbyKNyHBEAOUpvpBqF7Y=; b=nYTzrwl5C0B9iQdt+nUAei8s/bdPXKAGw7J42wSi7ZpqXfLClp7oEjk8QoPtLwcVHa CsfkX6O4ucGICHqkjGyuM+J/reTml/tvQHeLKOv1GsC/x6ItQuzA8YsO2w9hmu8djV8D Nr7HLEBJcxe7gJyTGi/scbClnDfaTw8sZ6lQja/OzZwo0APsMALAzzN99sD+Z32bVK5R y0U3FNTRBaJiQhqQTu63iZlpN9ah8UWZD4zl4JP8WUktAeNkxIcQcxbUkLGaN6XVTBuh vjI5VnWJoAWVzzKX5K2l8RWcFJytbzj9GvcNEhom5ozM0d1zalEN6TpKFU4DAMSE5lP1 Wbhg== Received: by 10.68.191.196 with SMTP id ha4mr12039123pbc.146.1337198878262; Wed, 16 May 2012 13:07:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.4] (c-107-3-156-34.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [107.3.156.34]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id rt4sm6484325pbc.3.2012.05.16.13.07.55 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 16 May 2012 13:07:57 -0700 (PDT) References: In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-928B96F6-F05F-4CA5-8715-FEF0AE08627A Message-Id: X-Mailer: iPad Mail (9B206) From: Sam Aldrin Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 13:07:54 -0700 To: Ross Callon Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 20:07:58 -0000 --Apple-Mail-928B96F6-F05F-4CA5-8715-FEF0AE08627A Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Support. Sam Sent from my iPad On May 11, 2012, at 7:24 AM, Ross Callon wrote: > Working Group, > =20 > This is to start a two week poll to see if there is support to adopt > =20 > draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping > =20 > as an mpls working group draft. > =20 > Pleased send your comments to the mpls working group mailing list (mpls@ie= tf.org). > =20 > This poll ends at the end of the day May 25, 2012 > =20 > Ross > for the mpls wg chairs > =20 > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --Apple-Mail-928B96F6-F05F-4CA5-8715-FEF0AE08627A Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Support.

Sam

Sent from my iPad

On May 11, 2012, at 7:24 AM, Ross Callon <rcallon@juniper.net> wrote:

Working Group,
 
This is to start a two week poll to see if there is support to adopt
 
    draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping
 
as an mpls working group draft.
 
Pleased send your comments to the mpls working group mailing list (mpls@ietf.org).
 
This poll ends at the end of the day May 25, 2012
 
Ross
for the mpls wg chairs
 
_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
--Apple-Mail-928B96F6-F05F-4CA5-8715-FEF0AE08627A-- From ping@pingpan.org Wed May 16 13:25:07 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94CD921F85D5 for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 13:25:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.698 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.698 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.278, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id b6SFHs6HW+ec for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 13:25:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from exprod7og114.obsmtp.com (exprod7og114.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.215]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id C1F5821F86B7 for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 13:25:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yw0-f43.google.com ([209.85.213.43]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob114.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKT7QNIpQ+E70QUQ3Vjhi5f3Bf2BIJ5Sx0@postini.com; Wed, 16 May 2012 13:25:06 PDT Received: by mail-yw0-f43.google.com with SMTP id k6so1352822yhk.2 for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 13:25:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=VWjU0tEViyEioKQpCwnN1rsjCwjdTsNdiQ1MzYe5p98=; b=FQeDbHDItW8jA3eDPQrk8KPHzQ2/0XDkfPn6CagwVi8hSmgqNqm9xZveoer+p4eJUl pw/XGheN5rtPmvczqHflRswFvh0yh7hPC1g88e5umc35a6wz25bzy8zcUa9YK94pHCN7 P4zMM/3qtqJGl9WUndGzZJR/saZg7D3rsHVRNU0dpYcHr0Aw+WFLTVdaee7+1Xv49umF OWaFfeu+FYCmlNAPehCa3kG9YHAdEE314ybGDgyxdrAP/rXXjpzcCyCEa7BH8slzaxH7 5BLHMBAjyifgPyjxeU980H9ntBgC14b0m52bRpQw1Y+D43Z/LxejR1eaB4WB00o3qk+6 JOQg== Received: by 10.42.150.8 with SMTP id y8mr2856889icv.10.1337199905778; Wed, 16 May 2012 13:25:05 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.50.178.67 with HTTP; Wed, 16 May 2012 13:24:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Ping Pan Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 04:24:25 +0800 Message-ID: To: Sam Aldrin Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=90e6ba6e8d2660adff04c02d1da3 X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkU0s5sdwKwrDHthi+Qv0rkEYoQrVbYGsgdLkbgQlZESlO7wHa2TDTdoY7kz/uMwnoD6+IV Cc: Ross Callon , "mpls@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 20:25:07 -0000 --90e6ba6e8d2660adff04c02d1da3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Support. On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 4:07 AM, Sam Aldrin wrote: > Support. > > Sam > > Sent from my iPad > > On May 11, 2012, at 7:24 AM, Ross Callon wrote: > > Working Group, > > This is to start a two week poll to see if there is support to adopt > > draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping > > as an mpls working group draft. > > Pleased send your comments to the mpls working group mailing list (* > mpls@ietf.org* ). > > This poll ends at the end of the day May 25, 2012 > > Ross > for the mpls wg chairs > > > _______________________________________________ > > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > --90e6ba6e8d2660adff04c02d1da3 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Support.

On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 4:07 AM,= Sam Aldrin <aldrin.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
Support.

Sam

= Sent from my iPad

On May 11, 2012, at = 7:24 AM, Ross Callon <rcallon@juniper.net> wrote:

Working Group,
=C2=A0
This is to start a two week poll to see if there is support to adopt
=C2=A0
=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping
=C2=A0
as an mpls working group draft.
=C2=A0
Pleased send your comments to the mpls working group mailing list (= mpls@ietf.org).
=C2=A0
This poll ends at the end of the day May 25, 2012
=C2=A0
Ross
for the mpls wg chairs
=C2=A0
_______= ________________________________________

= mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
ht= tps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls


--90e6ba6e8d2660adff04c02d1da3-- From lufang@cisco.com Wed May 16 13:37:14 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 584C521F8726 for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 13:37:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.448 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.448 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XHEdFX--tifl for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 13:37:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.86.77]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4756821F8733 for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 13:37:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=lufang@cisco.com; l=6612; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1337200633; x=1338410233; h=mime-version:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: references:from:to; bh=Bs+LRxZRVGT+hPgQhS4bDccimnKUVqWxDeI8/V2hkXU=; b=k5gZ4Z9U5hWJRTA5kXhfHoSkzdS90nm6IUllnu79y7jM2SIrMWaP2MSE E5tbL9yeR+4Yvyf6/F0JvWh/pvt1lsO/SiCZ57I6FAJpoAeg3c1vD15RD 9eVULUN7yqg4/zG5U/25mgMQfNR6thwtM0ZNMV7m7eGxB9lC4smNoC0kN o=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAFAJMPtE+tJXHA/2dsb2JhbABEgkWxSYEHghUBAQEEEgEJEQM+GwIBCA4DBAEBCwYXAQYBRQkIAQEEARIIGodsm1mgBIsThHNiA4hjm26BaYMH X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,604,1330905600"; d="scan'208,217";a="83887492" Received: from rcdn-core2-5.cisco.com ([173.37.113.192]) by rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 16 May 2012 20:36:58 +0000 Received: from xbh-rcd-301.cisco.com (xbh-rcd-301.cisco.com [72.163.63.8]) by rcdn-core2-5.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q4GKaw4h020297; Wed, 16 May 2012 20:36:58 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-201.cisco.com ([72.163.62.208]) by xbh-rcd-301.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 16 May 2012 15:36:57 -0500 x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CD33A3.A38D6647" Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 15:36:54 -0500 Message-ID: <238542D917511A45B6B8AA806E875E2508B45E3B@XMB-RCD-201.cisco.com> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping Thread-Index: Ac0vgcJX70M9Do4pRz++u0vZUWYe/wEIdPoQ References: From: "Luyuan Fang (lufang)" To: "Ross Callon" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 May 2012 20:36:57.0788 (UTC) FILETIME=[A36937C0:01CD33A3] Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 20:37:14 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01CD33A3.A38D6647 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Support. Luyuan =20 From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ross Callon Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 10:24 AM To: 'mpls@ietf.org' Subject: [mpls] Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping =20 Working Group, =20 This is to start a two week poll to see if there is support to adopt =20 draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping =20 as an mpls working group draft. =20 Pleased send your comments to the mpls working group mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). =20 This poll ends at the end of the day May 25, 2012 =20 Ross for the mpls wg chairs =20 ------_=_NextPart_001_01CD33A3.A38D6647 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Support.

Luyuan

 

From:= = mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ross Callon
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 10:24 AM
To: 'mpls@ietf.org'
Subject: [mpls] Poll on = draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping

 

Working Group,

 <= /p>

This is to start a two week poll to see if there is support to = adopt

 <= /p>

    draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping

 <= /p>

as an mpls working group draft.

 <= /p>

Pleased send your comments to the mpls working group mailing list (mpls@ietf.org).

 <= /p>

This poll ends at the end of the day May 25, 2012

 <= /p>

Ross

for the mpls wg chairs

 

------_=_NextPart_001_01CD33A3.A38D6647-- From tnadeau@lucidvision.com Wed May 16 13:42:37 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 736D621F864D for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 13:42:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.202 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ysHlhG6+uijI for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 13:42:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lucidvision.com (lucidvision.com [72.71.250.34]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D48C721F862A for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 13:42:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lucidvision.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33AFD211FB96; Wed, 16 May 2012 16:42:36 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at www.lucidvision.com Received: from lucidvision.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (static-72-71-250-34.cncdnh.fios.verizon.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ubss0zbWHGAu; Wed, 16 May 2012 16:42:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [10.138.253.241] (mobile-166-137-139-241.mycingular.net [166.137.139.241]) by lucidvision.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99AB7211FB8D; Wed, 16 May 2012 16:42:35 -0400 (EDT) References: In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-32EEA89E-CA9A-484B-B883-DF03CEB4B688 Message-Id: <2B2A7655-DDF4-4120-9FC0-CCA9DAF85018@lucidvision.com> X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (9B206) From: Thomas Nadeau Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 16:42:32 -0400 To: Carlos Pignataro Cc: Ross Callon , "mpls@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] Fwd: draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping-03 - Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping for IPv6 Pseudowire FECs X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 20:42:37 -0000 --Apple-Mail-32EEA89E-CA9A-484B-B883-DF03CEB4B688 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii support On Apr 6, 2012, at 3:18 PM, Carlos Pignataro wrote: > George, chairs, >=20 > This document is quite straightforward and has been stable for some time. W= e have incorporated all the comments that we received from the WG. >=20 > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping-03 >=20 > We would like to request if you could poll the group for WG adoption as an= MPLS WG doc. >=20 > Thank you, >=20 > -- Carlos & Mach. > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --Apple-Mail-32EEA89E-CA9A-484B-B883-DF03CEB4B688 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
support


<= div>
On Apr 6, 2012, at 3:18 PM, Carlos Pignataro <cpignata@cisco.com> wrote:

George, chairs,

This= document is quite straightforward and has been stable for some time. We hav= e incorporated all the comments that we received from the WG.

http://t= ools.ietf.org/html/draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping-03

We would like to request if you could poll the group for WG adoption= as an MPLS WG doc.

Thank you,

=
-- Carlos & Mach.
_______________________________________________
= mpls mailing list
mpl= s@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
= --Apple-Mail-32EEA89E-CA9A-484B-B883-DF03CEB4B688-- From gregimirsky@gmail.com Thu May 17 08:11:56 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F78621F85D8 for ; Thu, 17 May 2012 08:11:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.39 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.39 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.208, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kzFaqrskARJX for ; Thu, 17 May 2012 08:11:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ob0-f172.google.com (mail-ob0-f172.google.com [209.85.214.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6011F21F85D3 for ; Thu, 17 May 2012 08:11:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: by obbeh20 with SMTP id eh20so3213233obb.31 for ; Thu, 17 May 2012 08:11:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=DTGzFdGsgrpAJBxLLkIUfP6pgdCHsr8W0B+PqNmLpBY=; b=qtVbPHmYrmHz5EsvlDfJvWiCUV3GzCH6u0bG57ylTTlTMqD4udr7//7UMynfqRMy+X l141t8dg1/N1ENNDRLV3h9nt/jERuq0cPlFQPIzjM1VniNXFtOOBldLiQiMgZps+uQna kdi36lXAv1tB1JqUUrFcnbeF6om2BMsbbIw7ogHFoHZ5o/FeFzOXbBdKIEV/cuQTJjca 4YsYgcqTaldulslcbU89D1S7Wr5Shck3U185Rhsqeoln+cq1Voo23yxU0u6uxEVjiRKx oLh/AJHgjJa1QVhk3JyPitbUlxJo72bcO4NxaRNBz+/u4ufqvJf2luOlICLlYkBD7qBY cCXQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.74.4 with SMTP id p4mr6856271obv.79.1337267514675; Thu, 17 May 2012 08:11:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.182.47.194 with HTTP; Thu, 17 May 2012 08:11:54 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 08:11:54 -0700 Message-ID: From: Greg Mirsky To: Carlos Pignataro Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d044518292e90e904c03cdb3a Cc: Ross Callon , mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] Fwd: draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping-03 - Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping for IPv6 Pseudowire FECs X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 15:11:56 -0000 --f46d044518292e90e904c03cdb3a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 yes/support Regards, Greg On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Carlos Pignataro wrote: > George, chairs, > > This document is quite straightforward and has been stable for some time. > We have incorporated all the comments that we received from the WG. > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping-03 > > We would like to request if you could poll the group for WG adoption as an > MPLS WG doc. > > Thank you, > > -- Carlos & Mach. > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > --f46d044518292e90e904c03cdb3a Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable yes/support

Regards,
Greg

On Fr= i, Apr 6, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Carlos Pignataro <cpignata@cisco.com>= wrote:
Geo= rge, chairs,

This document is quite straightforward and = has been stable for some time. We have incorporated all the comments that w= e received from the WG.

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-ls= p-ping-03

We would like to request if you coul= d poll the group for WG adoption as an MPLS WG doc.

Thank you,

-- Carlos &am= p; Mach.

_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
ht= tps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls


--f46d044518292e90e904c03cdb3a-- From roberttao@huawei.com Fri May 18 10:42:36 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68C6521F84BF for ; Fri, 18 May 2012 10:42:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.393 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.393 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[HTML_FONT_FACE_BAD=0.606, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AMIIrq-xrTCW for ; Fri, 18 May 2012 10:42:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dfwrgout.huawei.com (dfwrgout.huawei.com [206.16.17.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED24121F85AA for ; Fri, 18 May 2012 10:42:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.9.243 (EHLO dfweml201-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.9.243]) by dfwrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.2.3-GA FastPath) with ESMTP id AGA89384; Fri, 18 May 2012 13:42:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from DFWEML406-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.131) by dfweml201-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.9.107) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Fri, 18 May 2012 10:40:52 -0700 Received: from dfweml512-mbx.china.huawei.com ([169.254.1.156]) by dfweml406-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.131]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Fri, 18 May 2012 10:40:56 -0700 From: Roberttao To: "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [mpls] Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping Thread-Index: Ac0vgcJX70M9Do4pRz++u0vZUWYe/wEWH4QAAACTq4AAUCV7sA== Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 17:40:56 +0000 Message-ID: <9E378A6551FE484FA7759260D56BD5FE172DCA2D@dfweml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.212.244.219] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_9E378A6551FE484FA7759260D56BD5FE172DCA2Ddfweml512mbxchi_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Cc: Ross Callon Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 17:42:36 -0000 --_000_9E378A6551FE484FA7759260D56BD5FE172DCA2Ddfweml512mbxchi_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Yes Support. Robert Tao On May 11, 2012, at 7:24 AM, Ross Callon > wrote: Working Group, This is to start a two week poll to see if there is support to adopt draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping as an mpls working group draft. Pleased send your comments to the mpls working group mailing list (mpls@iet= f.org). This poll ends at the end of the day May 25, 2012 Ross for the mpls wg chairs _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --_000_9E378A6551FE484FA7759260D56BD5FE172DCA2Ddfweml512mbxchi_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Yes Support.

Robert Tao


On May 11, 2012, at 7:24 AM, Ross Callon <rcallon@juniper.net> wrote:

Working Group,

 

This is to start a two = week poll to see if there is support to adopt

 

    draf= t-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping

 

as an mpls working grou= p draft.

 

Pleased send your comme= nts to the mpls working group mailing list (mpls@ietf.org).

 

This poll ends at the e= nd of the day May 25, 2012

 

Ross<= /font>

for the mpls wg chairs

 <= /p>

____________________________________= ___________


_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
ht= tps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

 

--_000_9E378A6551FE484FA7759260D56BD5FE172DCA2Ddfweml512mbxchi_-- From Tina.Tsou.Zouting@huawei.com Fri May 18 12:01:08 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E59B21F8818 for ; Fri, 18 May 2012 12:01:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.393 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.393 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[HTML_FONT_FACE_BAD=0.606, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WDbzSPJ92zlV for ; Fri, 18 May 2012 12:01:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dfwrgout.huawei.com (dfwrgout.huawei.com [206.16.17.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5760C21F87E6 for ; Fri, 18 May 2012 12:00:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.9.243 (EHLO dfweml202-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.9.243]) by dfwrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.2.3-GA FastPath) with ESMTP id AGA94053; Fri, 18 May 2012 15:00:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from DFWEML403-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.151) by dfweml202-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.9.108) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Fri, 18 May 2012 11:58:49 -0700 Received: from dfweml513-mbx.china.huawei.com ([169.254.3.80]) by dfweml403-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.151]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Fri, 18 May 2012 11:58:37 -0700 From: Tina TSOU To: Roberttao Thread-Topic: [mpls] Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping Thread-Index: Ac0vgcJX70M9Do4pRz++u0vZUWYe/wEWH4QAAACTq4AAUCV7sAACxX6j Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 18:58:36 +0000 Message-ID: References: , <9E378A6551FE484FA7759260D56BD5FE172DCA2D@dfweml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <9E378A6551FE484FA7759260D56BD5FE172DCA2D@dfweml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_DFE9E865956D4132BE57AE1BE515916Ehuaweicom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Cc: Ross Callon , "mpls@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 19:01:08 -0000 --_000_DFE9E865956D4132BE57AE1BE515916Ehuaweicom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Yes/support. Tina On May 18, 2012, at 11:01 AM, "Roberttao" > wrote: Yes Support. Robert Tao On May 11, 2012, at 7:24 AM, Ross Callon > wrote: Working Group, This is to start a two week poll to see if there is support to adopt draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping as an mpls working group draft. Pleased send your comments to the mpls working group mailing list (mpls@iet= f.org). This poll ends at the end of the day May 25, 2012 Ross for the mpls wg chairs _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --_000_DFE9E865956D4132BE57AE1BE515916Ehuaweicom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Yes/support.

Tina

On May 18, 2012, at 11:01 AM, "Roberttao" <roberttao@huawei.com> wrote:

Yes Support.

Robert Tao


On May 11, 2012, at 7:24 AM, Ross Callon <rcallon@juniper.net> wrote:

Working Group,

 

This is to start a two = week poll to see if there is support to adopt

 

    draf= t-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping

 

as an mpls working grou= p draft.

 

Pleased send your comme= nts to the mpls working group mailing list (mpls@ietf.org).

 

This poll ends at the e= nd of the day May 25, 2012

 

Ross<= /font>

for the mpls wg chairs

 <= /p>

____________________________________= ___________


_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
ht= tps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

 

--_000_DFE9E865956D4132BE57AE1BE515916Ehuaweicom_-- From PPan@infinera.com Mon May 7 23:52:29 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52D3921F860E for ; Mon, 7 May 2012 23:52:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fj8aeBoMw5WT for ; Mon, 7 May 2012 23:52:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sv-casht-prod1.infinera.com (sv-casht-prod1.infinera.com [8.4.225.24]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93C3421F860D for ; Mon, 7 May 2012 23:52:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SV-EXDB-PROD2.infinera.com ([fe80::1d05:1822:aaea:ff52]) by sv-casht-prod1.infinera.com ([10.100.97.218]) with mapi id 14.02.0247.003; Mon, 7 May 2012 23:52:27 -0700 From: Ping Pan To: Mach Chen , Ross Callon , Carlos Pignataro , "rajiva@cisco.com" , "'mpls@ietf.org'" Thread-Topic: Reminder regarding IPR on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping Thread-Index: Ac0svzJFj8x0V+lnTee+Xr1/T5UJawAB6nRgAAgP67A= Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.100.156.128] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_FEAF6B517274834CAE12C974DA17B1D903EAD4B5SVEXDBPROD2infi_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 23 May 2012 04:45:42 -0700 Subject: Re: [mpls] Reminder regarding IPR on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 06:52:29 -0000 X-Original-Date: Tue, 8 May 2012 06:52:26 +0000 X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 06:52:29 -0000 --_000_FEAF6B517274834CAE12C974DA17B1D903EAD4B5SVEXDBPROD2infi_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable None from here. Regards, Ping From: Mach Chen [mailto:mach.chen@huawei.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 11:02 AM To: Ross Callon; Ping Pan; Carlos Pignataro; rajiva@cisco.com; 'mpls@ietf.o= rg' Subject: RE: Reminder regarding IPR on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping Hi Ross, None from my end. Best regards, Mach From: Ross Callon [mailto:rcallon@juniper.net] Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 10:07 AM To: Mach Chen; ppan@infinera.com; Carlos Pignataro; rajiva@cisco.com; 'mpls= @ietf.org' Subject: Reminder regarding IPR on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping The authors have asked for draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping to be considere= d for adoption as a WG document. Before doing this, we would like to check = whether there is IPR on the document that needs to be disclosed. Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping? = If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see R= FCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). If you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to thi= s email regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. Thi= s document will not advance to the next stage until a response has been rec= eived from each author and contributor. If you are on the MPLS WG email list but are not listed as an author or con= tributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR t= hat has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. Thanks, Ross (as MPLS WG co-chair) --_000_FEAF6B517274834CAE12C974DA17B1D903EAD4B5SVEXDBPROD2infi_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

None from here.

 <= /p>

Regards,

 <= /p>

Ping

 <= /p>

From: Mach Chen [mailto:mach.chen@huawei.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 11:02 AM
To: Ross Callon; Ping Pan; Carlos Pignataro; rajiva@cisco.com; 'mpls= @ietf.org'
Subject: RE: Reminder regarding IPR on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-p= ing

 

Hi Ross,

 

None from my end.

 

Best regards,

Mach

 

From: Ro= ss Callon [mailto:rcallon@juniper.net]
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 10:07 AM
To: Mach Chen; ppan@infinera.com; Carlos Pignataro; rajiva@cisco.com= ; 'mpls@ietf.org'
Subject: Reminder regarding IPR on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping<= o:p>

 

The authors have asked for draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-l= sp-ping to be considered for= adoption as a WG document. Before doing this, we would like to check whether there is IPR on the document that needs to be disclo= sed.

 

Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-l= sp-ping? If so, has this IPR= 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 regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. This document will not advance to the next stag= e until a response has been received from each author and contributor.=

 

If you are on the MPLS WG email list but are not listed as a= n 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.

 

Thanks, Ross

(as MPLS WG co-chair)

 

--_000_FEAF6B517274834CAE12C974DA17B1D903EAD4B5SVEXDBPROD2infi_-- From lmishra.ietf@yahoo.ca Fri May 11 00:20:19 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2935721F860E for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 00:20:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 3.462 X-Spam-Level: *** X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.462 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.260, BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_210=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_25=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5z6Nd73IgaL6 for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 00:20:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm24-vm1.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com (nm24-vm1.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com [98.138.90.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 5D9DB21F8554 for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 00:20:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [98.138.90.55] by nm24.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 11 May 2012 07:20:13 -0000 Received: from [98.138.226.161] by tm8.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 11 May 2012 07:20:13 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1062.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 11 May 2012 07:20:13 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 515605.84584.bm@omp1062.mail.ne1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 67628 invoked by uid 60001); 11 May 2012 07:20:13 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.ca; s=s1024; t=1336720813; bh=9kt88l3RZf+D6x/V3dMDHnWsJrcFX0jM3OCxsjRoie0=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=Fsi6SBStW5dP9zxp2W+UvhqDqT1bRx7I0xaSK2EzqOI2bqfpQvslC3WYizkZubSZ2h2yYmj1L10pXaVguJS8U4pRcYJRiompK/IDUyw6pY5kpNEjVv8gIoViAjDm09J58/aCNJdXIpdgFbgcqP0PDb0gdjzPHN0TIxZ7fi/3rZg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.ca; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=XHFekW9yhn4VTcenRD/TvF60T/d2XypJdR/SCKEgWPgsnbojTcdjP6eTt+saR3TQTUQTOPh3mESZCcC0gq1d2PhkYlGC88xgoDTL8JF5Kdx7MzYma8X2qZ4Wi+CX8eiT7LmSzrKPKRE0Q2uA/DGREQVmlLPmKnpzf7nnzMa9bg8=; X-YMail-OSG: 3YJMI44VM1m23m464NHW0X8d3jRVaPuFBzU4e3TSsTDTPQH WzB2EUIrWuNvcfeTkc2Qs6Wd0eDyplDceVi1bgMtk48R7oV77kuTkzvqeS9t zTrHRoCoi8pLznufLRtJLE.8.ro_JDTNUv9HDZ0.VlVqzWncIP8dNXxg1Gi0 ITAhTgL0rWwXRqgRZgNQlo5eXr6d1oSBUMzbRv7rOoX2fxV5vQmV4E_iUsGl uKxRY5l14y6TrO337QzLrbgihYS1dJniupW.J_fdApZXFhM1UyKtD.WL8II_ Ey5VNCwzgdf5wtV0aNzr6S8sjWmzzlud0tTqzo.R1jkAMFXYX.b_DBy52ujk YYRpl6ESFsZ6r50KqMafsSHW_N1Ult2oANQw.yRNz80KGSjazmiyk3R1NpXb t4Upho675tLGZs_d3x4WeuMi1MGfV Received: from [122.167.26.207] by web121504.mail.ne1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 11 May 2012 00:20:12 PDT X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.118.349524 References: <1336544201.86796.YahooMailNeo@web161903.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <1336544996.71381.YahooMailNeo@web161902.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <1336621446.52192.YahooMailNeo@web161904.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <1336720651.85170.YahooMailNeo@web161903.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1336720812.67596.YahooMailNeo@web121504.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 00:20:12 -0700 (PDT) From: Lingaraj Mishra To: "\"yaacov.weingarten@nsn.com\"" , "\"mpls-tp@ietf.org\"" , "\"mpls@ietf.org\"" In-Reply-To: <1336720651.85170.YahooMailNeo@web161903.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="1050781934-1866900242-1336720812=:67596" X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 23 May 2012 04:45:42 -0700 Subject: [mpls] RFC6378 X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Lingaraj Mishra List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 07:30:31 -0000 --1050781934-1866900242-1336720812=:67596 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =A0=0AHello MPLS-TP Protection Authors,=0A=0A=0AMy questions are far more s= impler than already asked at archived thread.=0A=0AWe are on verge of imple= menting MPLS-TP on our product.=0AAnd there goes some questions about LINEA= R protection scenario.=0A=0A1 - The RFC6378 does not discuss anything about= topology of LINEAR protection i.e 1:n. It should give different pictures o= f possible LINEAR topologies where protection can be applied. If we follow = T-MPLS which is REJECTED now, it has more clear pictures of how LINEAR netw= ork topologies=A0like 1+1, 1:1 and 1:n. As you can see, there is no other n= etwork topology being standardized yet and complete=A0AGGREGATION or CORE n= etwork topology can not be contained in=A0just LINEAR,=A0we will fall back = to native MPLS protection mechanisms (facility bypass, detour) in=A0those s= cenarios.=A0=A0But, I think we are still missing something here i.e. SNC pr= otectection etc.=0A=0A2 - What are the values of WTR and hold-off timer? Th= is values are normally constant in TRANSPORT world. The hold-on and hold-of= f values are are defined by G.707 or GR-253 for same. Are there any standar= d values for MPLS based defects?=0A=0A3 - Why value of PT(Protection Type) = is already fixed ? Are we planning again new=A0format=A0for RING topology? = The RING topology in TRANSPORT world is always 1+1 and Bi-directional.=0A= =0A4 - There is no such provision for ET(Extra Traffic) in case of 1:1 scen= ario. I think we can include same here not to under-utilize protection PATH= .=0A=0A5=A0- Please confirm that current status of T-MPLS G.8131 stands as = rejected. RFC6378 hold all rights for MPLS-TP v1.0.=0A=0AI will be waiting = for an early reply on this.=0AThanks for your help.=0A=0ARegards,=0ALingara= j --1050781934-1866900242-1336720812=:67596 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
&nb= sp;
Hello MPLS-TP Protection Authors,
<= div style=3D"font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif; font-siz= e: 12pt;">
 
My quest= ions are far more simpler than already asked at archived thread.
=  
We are on verge of implementing MPLS-TP on our product.
And there goes some questions about LINEAR protection=0A scenario.
&= nbsp;
1 - The RFC6378 does not discuss anything about topology of= LINEAR protection i.e 1:n. It should give different pictures of possible L= INEAR topologies where protection can be applied. If we follow T-MPLS which= is REJECTED now, it has more clear pictures of how LINEAR network topologi= es like=0A 1+1, 1:1 and 1:n. As you can see, there is no other network= topology being standardized yet and complete AGGREGATION or CORE netw= ork topology can not be contained in just LINEAR, we will fall ba= ck to native MPLS protection mechanisms (facility bypass, detour) in t= hose scenarios.  But, I think we are still missing something here= i.e. SNC protectection etc.
 
2 - What are the va= lues of WTR and hold-off timer? This values are normally constant in TRANSP= ORT world. The hold-on and hold-off values are are defined by G.707 or GR-2= 53 for same. Are there any standard values for MPLS based defects?
 
3 - Why value of PT(Protection Type) is already fixed ? = Are we planning again new format for RING topology? The RING topo= logy in TRANSPORT world is always 1+1 and Bi-directional.
 <= /div>
4 - There is no such provision for ET(Extra Traffic) in case of 1= :1=0A scenario. I think we can include same here not to under-utilize prote= ction PATH.
 
5 - Please confirm that current= status of T-MPLS G.8131 stands as rejected. RFC6378 hold all rights for MP= LS-TP v1.0.
 
I will be waiting for an early reply= on this.
Thanks for your help.
 
Regard= s,
Lingaraj
 
 

=




--1050781934-1866900242-1336720812=:67596-- From lmishra.ietf@yahoo.ca Sat May 12 20:24:34 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 765ED9E800A for ; Sat, 12 May 2012 20:24:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.434 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.434 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.233, BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_210=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_25=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 16sjzIAQ8hH3 for ; Sat, 12 May 2012 20:24:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm2-vm2.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com (nm2-vm2.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com [98.138.91.18]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id C132F9E8005 for ; Sat, 12 May 2012 20:24:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [98.138.90.48] by nm2.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 13 May 2012 03:24:31 -0000 Received: from [98.138.87.7] by tm1.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 13 May 2012 03:24:31 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1007.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 13 May 2012 03:24:30 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 998084.79900.bm@omp1007.mail.ne1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 22511 invoked by uid 60001); 13 May 2012 03:24:30 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.ca; s=s1024; t=1336879470; bh=el/BMESxxwYN3e1c5fB+VLaA0FqHcfcnX4lLEq0eAfM=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=oGLC1j3wgM4eET9EmFp23YnvhfXk2uehFsXbunUCbtu1aM/E/AStDStiS1Md5JFCOgFB4CgZyGWUFK/Sh1llbo85VRG/zh0quE1wttg/iCWJH7dmltvwCTt/ClJwuqsgvyFqSW+Zp0PutSF6MHxJhSelDw8JkHk1bmz0EWCBnlw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.ca; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=2hjK8OoLHr79cTME2qoX6wfQ/LjAXdHWZIapvOc/I6fpEqXn+/SA8sy9uXeayaOK/zTRkkO6WqPymZHyZTpSeql3xh3EXVU/9xmsBIC7BOlcEd60FcCmhoSRfGYUSOr9uBql6Yoi/YojSi5QWY7JcDKUvFdJIXS6tLqr/pyAdNM=; X-YMail-OSG: Km28kaYVM1mta5jwFVtvf_z7Ma6uwV88VXrJrQENshG7X.Q tPXUooXT1NJt52JnihSqIFAPpXAkyHcZoNNs48088MV1pzkjcTG0s_wEqxEZ 8E2WdeRy4H_c7cUoy8GAGI5EmCMDvkftUI0xQQ0bccVnRxNcqOL14OtKFGmO fT042XA4u49E7btFb0_8sMdlAvD8iRFOnMJV5BlTgCKmsDySwIGmGGLVAnL_ iRFueSCtLF9iav2GaJQYOUSZJ.ZNkRdKE1q5I62_LY2uX.5VrgUNtJ5BDgzi qXCDvLVKoYZEBoHO4v.5UlNOLCkBFNS_fyhUJr6GOMbYlJs724mSWyi77ahS AGJrYJG26DRm80lvR5kmHcoAq6dQwkoIbOLmfO5P4HqIb5bIvs5WDaOmcd9w jTUNLSNmVdkjo6egQBHe6HFguhAg- Received: from [106.51.77.191] by web121506.mail.ne1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sat, 12 May 2012 20:24:30 PDT X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.118.349524 References: <1336544201.86796.YahooMailNeo@web161903.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <1336544996.71381.YahooMailNeo@web161902.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <1336621446.52192.YahooMailNeo@web161904.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <1336720651.85170.YahooMailNeo@web161903.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <1336720812.67596.YahooMailNeo@web121504.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1336879470.22456.YahooMailNeo@web121506.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 20:24:30 -0700 (PDT) From: Lingaraj Mishra To: "\"yaacov.weingarten@nsn.com\"" , "\"mpls-tp@ietf.org\"" , "\"mpls@ietf.org\"" In-Reply-To: <1336720812.67596.YahooMailNeo@web121504.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="361483536-778450623-1336879470=:22456" X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 23 May 2012 04:45:42 -0700 Subject: [mpls] RFC6378 X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Lingaraj Mishra List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 03:24:34 -0000 --361483536-778450623-1336879470=:22456 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =0AHello MPLS-TP Protection Authors,=0A=0A=0AMy questions are far more simp= ler than already asked at archived thread.=0A=0AWe are on verge of implemen= ting MPLS-TP on our product.=0AAnd there goes some questions about LINEAR p= rotection scenario.=0A=0A1 - The RFC6378 does not discuss anything about to= pology of LINEAR protection i.e 1:n. It should give different pictures of p= ossible LINEAR topologies where protection can be applied. If we follow T-M= PLS which is REJECTED now, it has more clear pictures of how LINEAR network= topologies=A0like 1+1, 1:1 and 1:n. As you can see, there is no other netw= ork topology being standardized yet and complete=A0AGGREGATION or CORE netw= ork topology can not be contained in=A0just LINEAR,=A0we will fall back to = native MPLS protection mechanisms (facility bypass, detour) in=A0those scen= arios.=A0=A0But, I think we are still missing something here i.e. SNC prote= ctection etc.=0A=0A2 - What are the values of WTR and hold-off timer? This = values are normally constant in TRANSPORT world. The hold-on and hold-off v= alues are are defined by G.707 or GR-253 for same. Are there any standard v= alues for MPLS based defects?=0A=0A3 - Why value of PT(Protection Type) is = already fixed ? Are we planning again new=A0format=A0for RING topology? The= RING topology in TRANSPORT world is always 1+1 and Bi-directional.=0A=0A4 = - There is no such provision for ET(Extra Traffic) in case of 1:1 scenario.= I think we can include same here not to under-utilize protection PATH.=0A= =0A5=A0- Please confirm that current status of T-MPLS G.8131 stands as reje= cted. RFC6378 hold all rights for MPLS-TP v1.0.=0A=0AI will be waiting for = an early reply on this.=0AThanks for your help.=0A=0ARegards,=0ALingaraj --361483536-778450623-1336879470=:22456 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello MPLS-TP Protection Authors,
 
My questions are far more simpl= er than already asked at archived thread.
 
We are= on verge of implementing MPLS-TP on our product.
And=0A there go= es some questions about LINEAR protection=0A scenario.
 
1 - The RFC6378 does not discuss anything about topology of LINEAR p= rotection i.e 1:n. It should give different pictures of possible LINEAR top= ologies where protection can be applied. If we follow T-MPLS which is REJEC= TED now, it has more clear pictures of how LINEAR network topologies l= ike=0A 1+1, 1:1 and 1:n. As you can see, there is no other network topology= being standardized yet and complete AGGREGATION or CORE network topol= ogy can not be contained in just LINEAR, we will fall back to nat= ive MPLS protection mechanisms (facility bypass, detour) in those scen= arios.  But, I think we are still missing something here i.e. SNC= protectection etc.
 
2 - What are the values of W= TR and hold-off timer? This values are normally constant in TRANSPORT world= . The hold-on and hold-off values are are defined by G.707 or GR-253 for sa= me. Are there any standard values for MPLS based defects?
 <= /div>
3 - Why value of PT(Protection Type) is already fixed ? Are we pl= anning again new format for RING topology? The RING topology in T= RANSPORT world is always 1+1 and Bi-directional.
 
4 - There is no such provision for ET(Extra Traffic) in case of 1:1=0A sce= nario. I think we can include same here not to under-utilize protection PAT= H.
 
5 - Please confirm that current status o= f T-MPLS G.8131 stands as rejected. RFC6378 hold all rights for MPLS-TP v1.= 0.
 
I will be waiting for an early reply on this.=
Thanks for your help.
 
Regards,
<= div>Lingaraj
 
 





=


--361483536-778450623-1336879470=:22456-- From christian.jacquenet@orange.com Mon May 14 05:41:39 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A51FE21F869C for ; Mon, 14 May 2012 05:41:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.623 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.623 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.976, BAYES_50=0.001, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zyDCLJT+JGhe for ; Mon, 14 May 2012 05:41:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relais-inet.francetelecom.com (relais-ias92.francetelecom.com [193.251.215.92]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE53A21F8450 for ; Mon, 14 May 2012 05:41:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from omfedm08.si.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.4]) by omfedm12.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id AE10918C42A; Mon, 14 May 2012 14:41:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from PUEXCH81.nanterre.francetelecom.fr (unknown [10.101.44.34]) by omfedm08.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 7372A238076; Mon, 14 May 2012 14:41:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from PUEXCB1C.nanterre.francetelecom.fr ([10.101.44.11]) by PUEXCH81.nanterre.francetelecom.fr ([10.101.44.34]) with mapi; Mon, 14 May 2012 14:41:37 +0200 From: To: Ross Callon , "'mpls@ietf.org'" Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 14:41:36 +0200 Thread-Topic: Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping Thread-Index: Ac0vgcJX70M9Do4pRz++u0vZUWYe/wCTQauw Message-ID: <11697_1336999297_4FB0FD81_11697_3109_1_983A1D8DA0DA5F4EB747BF34CBEE5CD15A0B60F191@PUEXCB1C.nanterre.francetelecom.fr> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: fr-FR Content-Language: fr-FR X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: fr-FR Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_983A1D8DA0DA5F4EB747BF34CBEE5CD15A0B60F191PUEXCB1Cnante_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-PMX-Version: 5.6.1.2065439, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.376379, Antispam-Data: 2012.5.14.115418 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 23 May 2012 04:45:42 -0700 Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 12:41:39 -0000 --_000_983A1D8DA0DA5F4EB747BF34CBEE5CD15A0B60F191PUEXCB1Cnante_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, I support the adoption of draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping as a mpls WG doc= ument. Cheers, Christian. ________________________________ De : mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] De la part de Ros= s Callon Envoy=E9 : vendredi 11 mai 2012 16:24 =C0 : 'mpls@ietf.org' Objet : [mpls] Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping Working Group, This is to start a two week poll to see if there is support to adopt draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping as an mpls working group draft. Pleased send your comments to the mpls working group mailing list (mpls@iet= f.org). This poll ends at the end of the day May 25, 2012 Ross for the mpls wg chairs ___________________________________________________________________________= ______________________________________________ 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, France Telecom - Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete al= tere, 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, France Telecom - Orange is not liable for message= s that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you. --_000_983A1D8DA0DA5F4EB747BF34CBEE5CD15A0B60F191PUEXCB1Cnante_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,
 
I support the adoption of=20 draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping as a mpls WG document.
 
Cheers,

Christian.

De : mpls-bounces@ietf.org=20 [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] De la part de Ross=20 Callon
Envoy=E9 : vendredi 11 mai 2012 16:24
=C0&nbs= p;:=20 'mpls@ietf.org'
Objet : [mpls] Poll on=20 draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping

Working Group,
 
This is to start a two week poll to see if there is support to=20 adopt
 
    draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping
 
as an mpls working group draft.
 
Pleased send your comments to the mpls working group mailing list (<= A=20 href=3D"mailto:mpls@ietf.org">mpls@ietf.org).
 
This poll ends at the end of the day May 25, 2012
 
Ross
for the mpls wg=20 chairs
 
______________________=
___________________________________________________________________________=
________________________

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,
France Telecom - Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete al=
tere, 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, France Telecom - Orange is not liable for message=
s that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.
--_000_983A1D8DA0DA5F4EB747BF34CBEE5CD15A0B60F191PUEXCB1Cnante_-- From matthew.r.meyer@gmail.com Thu May 17 17:15:58 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2854721F876D for ; Thu, 17 May 2012 17:15:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lj7+o5iuhXz0 for ; Thu, 17 May 2012 17:15:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ob0-f172.google.com (mail-ob0-f172.google.com [209.85.214.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F4CC21F8736 for ; Thu, 17 May 2012 17:15:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by obbeh20 with SMTP id eh20so3839374obb.31 for ; Thu, 17 May 2012 17:15:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=8SF7swX2WYR2FlbX6KRuYRdUVf3jy7oT3i6xWmJF9E8=; b=fxYVgwDiZCnZEZhM1s7+srIq8O7TNYGNUIxNGmhRpR8Ho2VEkoCkmgJsRhwirwngdh PDFbY0NxEIDxTbx5SGdIgUxGIqJtKkYM46sGHWeZB+LX6ClQyMJ1hfNYkG1mcoFRefnG jk6aahXaIl80YeecHv1kknKgmFOFoRk1UGJTB68n/Bus3ECH8LAzs17bxbHYpp0mqcQT P8ngfI+KjJEg8LZQvv9z+VRXe59+GYhm0ieRUUKMQriWqotAxH3GNjQVWTelQ9MgDfvW bjlOwA3zs3iYeptFj/6sTpO/FxumjbyN0TIcaKno2ioRIner6mpOoYYXHOgNzcqTJIlQ fWLw== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.60.170.38 with SMTP id aj6mr902594oec.51.1337300157213; Thu, 17 May 2012 17:15:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.182.96.196 with HTTP; Thu, 17 May 2012 17:15:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.182.96.196 with HTTP; Thu, 17 May 2012 17:15:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 20:15:57 -0400 Message-ID: From: Matthew Meyer To: Ross Callon Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec554098cd42b7504c04474f7 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 23 May 2012 04:45:42 -0700 Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 00:15:58 -0000 --bcaec554098cd42b7504c04474f7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Support! Matt On May 11, 2012 10:24 AM, "Ross Callon" wrote: > Working Group, > > This is to start a two week poll to see if there is support to adopt > > draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping > > as an mpls working group draft. > > Pleased send your comments to the mpls working group mailing list (* > mpls@ietf.org* ). > > This poll ends at the end of the day May 25, 2012 > > Ross > for the mpls wg chairs > > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > --bcaec554098cd42b7504c04474f7 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Support!

Matt

On May 11, 2012 10:24 AM, "Ross Callon"= ; <rcallon@juniper.net> wr= ote:
Working Group,
=A0
This is to start a two week poll to see if there is support to adopt
=A0
=A0=A0=A0 draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping
=A0
as an mpls working group draft.
=A0
Pleased send your comments to the mpls working group mailing list (= mpls@ietf.org).
=A0
This poll ends at the end of the day May 25, 2012
=A0
Ross
for the mpls wg chairs
=A0

_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
ht= tps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

--bcaec554098cd42b7504c04474f7-- From wyaacov@gmail.com Wed May 23 05:11:05 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E338B21F86E4 for ; Wed, 23 May 2012 05:11:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.398 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.398 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_210=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_25=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UaBotnnYMvzf for ; Wed, 23 May 2012 05:11:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qa0-f49.google.com (mail-qa0-f49.google.com [209.85.216.49]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AF4B21F86E3 for ; Wed, 23 May 2012 05:11:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by qabj40 with SMTP id j40so4017058qab.15 for ; Wed, 23 May 2012 05:11:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=qnZZ6EXS0jnOPLVWL2nR3XVGRDzD2X/RF7gI1sgkjGw=; b=0pmUHMIrExSYcCdFcVux1QRnIEhJSQI2giSDmTqqgK/tcbKvHCaHknF9VAjbuzduDI pwaxWIf+o/jYnoJ88iO+p5H4610pjTx/JRQ8R54ZzSGpowvJPntIrXFNnSYc8e+8Sg9H tq10GSPOPOmE3+luOmGRQYdaXu5qjQrwZrLqyoUiRArVjdSPAwmE6zy3t2cTal/nw8tk SDC9HoOBDWsOMseIuCQy5H6DMvXUZJk8LMzz/pBuVE9/vBzkunwSrbk3I9ywKY2OMJSl V6d1vMRXu8rcHs1QkZOHh3n7M9SjibShV7/VxXOvYLqOcrDz34WSSy3VVQz2Cr1Jet46 J68w== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.224.106.136 with SMTP id x8mr5520326qao.12.1337775064504; Wed, 23 May 2012 05:11:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.150.13 with HTTP; Wed, 23 May 2012 05:11:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.150.13 with HTTP; Wed, 23 May 2012 05:11:04 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1336720812.67596.YahooMailNeo@web121504.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1336544201.86796.YahooMailNeo@web161903.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <1336544996.71381.YahooMailNeo@web161902.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <1336621446.52192.YahooMailNeo@web161904.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <1336720651.85170.YahooMailNeo@web161903.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <1336720812.67596.YahooMailNeo@web121504.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 15:11:04 +0300 Message-ID: From: Yaacov Weingarten To: Lingaraj Mishra Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf3074b31c8258f304c0b30705 Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] RFC6378 X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 12:11:06 -0000 --20cf3074b31c8258f304c0b30705 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi, I believe that I addressed most of your questions in an earlier thread. 1. Basically 1:n is covered in a separate draft that is being advanced in the group (see draft-ezy-mpls-1ton...) 2. Values for the timers should hopefully appear in either the MIB or a future ITU document 3. Do not understand connection between PT field and different topologies 4. RFC5654 states that ET is frowned upon 5. The IETF does not comment on the status of ITU documents (I personally got into hot-water on a previous occasion) 6. The mpls-tp mailing list is defunct, I no longer work at NSN therefore direct mail to my gmail address Hope this helps more than my previous attempt, yaacov weingarten On May 23, 2012 2:46 PM, "Lingaraj Mishra" wrote: > > Hello MPLS-TP Protection Authors, > > My questions are far more simpler than already asked at archived thread. > > We are on verge of implementing MPLS-TP on our product. > And there goes some questions about LINEAR protection scenario. > > 1 - The RFC6378 does not discuss anything about topology of LINEAR > protection i.e 1:n. It should give different pictures of possible LINEAR > topologies where protection can be applied. If we follow T-MPLS which is > REJECTED now, it has more clear pictures of how LINEAR network > topologies like 1+1, 1:1 and 1:n. As you can see, there is no other network > topology being standardized yet and complete AGGREGATION or CORE network > topology can not be contained in just LINEAR, we will fall back to native > MPLS protection mechanisms (facility bypass, detour) in those > scenarios. But, I think we are still missing something here i.e. SNC > protectection etc. > > 2 - What are the values of WTR and hold-off timer? This values are > normally constant in TRANSPORT world. The hold-on and hold-off values are > are defined by G.707 or GR-253 for same. Are there any standard values for > MPLS based defects? > > 3 - Why value of PT(Protection Type) is already fixed ? Are we planning > again new format for RING topology? The RING topology in TRANSPORT world is > always 1+1 and Bi-directional. > > 4 - There is no such provision for ET(Extra Traffic) in case of 1:1 > scenario. I think we can include same here not to under-utilize protection > PATH. > > 5 - Please confirm that current status of T-MPLS G.8131 stands as > rejected. RFC6378 hold all rights for MPLS-TP v1.0. > > I will be waiting for an early reply on this. > Thanks for your help. > > Regards, > Lingaraj > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > --20cf3074b31c8258f304c0b30705 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi,
I believe that I addressed most of your questions in an earlier thread.

1. Basically 1:n is covered in a separate draft that is being advanced i= n the group (see draft-ezy-mpls-1ton...)

2. Values for the timers should hopefully appear in either the MIB or a = future ITU document

3. Do not understand connection between PT field and different topologie= s

4. RFC5654 states that ET is frowned upon

5. The IETF does not comment on the status of ITU documents (I personall= y got into hot-water on a previous occasion)

6. The mpls-tp mailing list is defunct, I no longer work at NSN therefor= e direct mail to my gmail address

Hope this helps more than my previous attempt,
yaacov weingarten

On May 23, 2012 2:46 PM, "Lingaraj Mishra&q= uot; <lmishra= .ietf@yahoo.ca> wrote:
=A0
Hello MPLS-TP Protection Authors,
=A0
My questions are far more si= mpler than already asked at archived thread.
=A0
We are on verge of implementing MPLS-TP on our product.<= /div>
And there goes some questions about LINEAR protection scenario.
=A0
1 - The RFC6378 does not discuss anythin= g about topology of LINEAR protection i.e 1:n. It should give different pic= tures of possible LINEAR topologies where protection can be applied. If we = follow T-MPLS which is REJECTED now, it has more clear pictures of how LINE= AR network topologies=A0like 1+1, 1:1 and 1:n. As you can see, there is no other network topology being= standardized yet and complete=A0AGGREGATION or CORE network topology can n= ot be contained in=A0just LINEAR,=A0we will fall back to native MPLS protec= tion mechanisms (facility bypass, detour) in=A0those scenarios.=A0=A0But, I= think we are still missing something here i.e. SNC protectection etc.
=A0
2 - What are the values of WTR and hold-off timer? This = values are normally constant in TRANSPORT world. The hold-on and hold-off v= alues are are defined by G.707 or GR-253 for same. Are there any standard v= alues for MPLS based defects?
=A0
3 - Why value of PT(Protection Type) is already fixed ? = Are we planning again new=A0format=A0for RING topology? The RING topology i= n TRANSPORT world is always 1+1 and Bi-directional.
=A0
4 - There is no such provision for ET(Extra Traffic) in case of 1:1 scenario. I think we can include same here not to under-utilize protection= PATH.
=A0
5=A0- Please confirm that current status of = T-MPLS G.8131 stands as rejected. RFC6378 hold all rights for MPLS-TP v1.0.=
=A0
I will be waiting for an early reply on this.
= Thanks for your help.
=A0
Regards,
Lingaraj
=A0
=A0






___________= ____________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
ht= tps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

--20cf3074b31c8258f304c0b30705-- From internet-drafts@ietf.org Wed May 23 05:41:39 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C7D721F85AF; Wed, 23 May 2012 05:41:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.5 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.099, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TXVI9aPkJ885; Wed, 23 May 2012 05:41:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F33CF21F855B; Wed, 23 May 2012 05:41:38 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.02 Message-ID: <20120523124138.27184.50712.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 05:41:38 -0700 Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mpls-gach-adv-01.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 12:41:39 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working= Group of the IETF. Title : MPLS Generic Associated Channel (G-ACh) Advertisement Pr= otocol Author(s) : Dan Frost Stewart Bryant Matthew Bocci Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-gach-adv-01.txt Pages : 18 Date : 2012-05-23 The MPLS Generic Associated Channel (G-ACh) provides an auxiliary logical data channel associated with a Label Switched Path (LSP), a pseudowire, or a section (link) over which a variety of protocols may flow. These protocols are commonly used to provide Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) mechanisms associated with the primary data channel. This document specifies simple procedures by which an endpoint of an LSP, pseudowire, or section may inform the other endpoints of its capabilities and configuration parameters, or other application-specific information. This information may then be used by the receiver to validate or adjust its local configuration, and by the network operator for diagnostic purposes. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-gach-adv-01.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-gach-adv-01.txt The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-gach-adv/ From internet-drafts@ietf.org Wed May 23 05:42:02 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DDD021F86EE; Wed, 23 May 2012 05:42:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.507 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.507 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.092, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MShNUuGJsIP9; Wed, 23 May 2012 05:42:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3343C21F86D5; Wed, 23 May 2012 05:42:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.02 Message-ID: <20120523124202.27189.83521.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 05:42:02 -0700 Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mpls-tp-ethernet-addressing-01.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 12:42:02 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working= Group of the IETF. Title : MPLS-TP Next-Hop Ethernet Addressing Author(s) : Dan Frost Stewart Bryant Matthew Bocci Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-tp-ethernet-addressing-01.txt Pages : 7 Date : 2012-05-23 The Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) is the set of MPLS protocol functions applicable to the construction and operation of packet-switched transport networks. This document presents considerations for link-layer addressing of Ethernet frames carrying MPLS-TP packets. This document is a product of a joint Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) / International Telecommunication Union Telecommunication Standardization Sector (ITU-T) effort to include an MPLS Transport Profile within the IETF MPLS and PWE3 architectures to support the capabilities and functionalities of a packet transport network. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-ethernet-addressing-= 01.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-ethernet-addressing-0= 1.txt The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-ethernet-addressing/ From jcucchiara@mindspring.com Wed May 23 08:28:08 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DD0A21F8770; Wed, 23 May 2012 08:28:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.137 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.137 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, SARE_SUB_OBFU_OTHER=0.135, STOX_REPLY_TYPE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zdJYqZdWNzOb; Wed, 23 May 2012 08:28:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from elasmtp-masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net (elasmtp-masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.68]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 529CD21F876E; Wed, 23 May 2012 08:28:07 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=RwNjgMcaYBBRCvfMhRvI9wf5lAh8+OnXS1oy4cNaUDDETxdOyHIb2eLYs1XmCGBs; h=Received:Message-ID:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [24.41.69.138] (helo=JoanPC) by elasmtp-masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1SXDTk-0000KE-F7; Wed, 23 May 2012 11:28:00 -0400 Message-ID: <016901cd38f8$eb6063a0$6701a8c0@JoanPC> From: "Joan Cucchiara" To: , "Thomas Nadeau" , , "Kannan KV Sampath" , "Sami Boutros" , Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 11:30:01 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-ELNK-Trace: 4d68bbe9cb71969ea344cf2d1a8e60840a9da525759e2654f71ab506a65ff4cfdc17fc4a35c05fb0a2d4e88014a4647c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 24.41.69.138 Cc: mpls@ietf.org, "MIB Doctors \(E-mail\)" , Ross Callon Subject: [mpls] Review for WG Adoption of draft-vkst-mpls-tp-oam-id-mib-02.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 15:28:08 -0000 Hello Authors, Thank you for proposing this solution. Please see my notes below. Thank you, -Joan 1) Coherency of document: A) Is document useful and likely to be used/useful in operational networks? This document contains a MIB Module with 2 tables. The tables allow creation of TP IDs of MPLS LSPs and Pseudowires. Also a pointer to rows in other MIBs Modules., i.e. to an MPLS Tunnel in the MPLS-TE-STD-MIB (RFC3012) or pseudowire in the PWE-STD-MIB (RFC5601). Since many vendors and operators support the MPLS-TE-STD-MIB and PW-STD-MIB, then one could agree with the authors that the architecture of this MIB is a viable approach. In other words, the authors are leveraging off of existing MIB implementations. They are doing this in a way which adheres to the rules of SMIv2 and I do think that the MIB is likely to be used/useful in operational networks. B) Is document technically sound? >From a MIB perspective, no: I) Many objects are of type "DisplayString" which is used in SMIv1 but not in SMIv2. As the MIB Common TC doc specifies: https://svn.tools.ietf.org/area/ops/trac/wiki/mib-common-tcs "Note 2. DisplayString does not support internationalized text. It MUST NOT be used for objects that are required to hold internationalized text (which is always the case if the object is intended for use by humans [RFC2277]). Designers SHOULD consider using SnmpAdminString, Utf8String, or LongUtf8String for such objects." II) The term "Trap" is used in both the document and the MIB. This needs to be replaced by the term "Notification". Traps a mechanism in SNMPv1. Please see RFC3584. 2) Is document ready for WG adoption? I would ask that changes to remove DisplayString and use a TC which supports internationalization be done, and the term Trap removed prior to WG adoption for reasons stated above. This request should only take a few minutes of editing, but will bring the document upto SMIv2. Additionally, a few comments (mostly as fyi): I) this MIB contains configuration (read-create) objects. II) the document proposes to root the MIB under mplsStdMIB which was the convention for the set of MPLS MIBs in 2004 but guidelines have changed since then. III) The use of the accessible-for-notify and imports of IFMIB tables do not seem necessary in the MIB's current state. As the MIB is updated, this should be removed or clarified. From tnadeau@juniper.net Wed May 23 14:17:06 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D9F011E8080; Wed, 23 May 2012 14:17:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.532 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.532 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.067, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, SARE_SUB_OBFU_OTHER=0.135] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vvBuNlRAsx+M; Wed, 23 May 2012 14:17:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from exprod7og118.obsmtp.com (exprod7og118.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.8]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5875111E8098; Wed, 23 May 2012 14:16:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from P-EMHUB02-HQ.jnpr.net ([66.129.224.36]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob118.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKT71TxB8OuOPEYE1D8xq5aoslKlBzrrfG@postini.com; Wed, 23 May 2012 14:17:05 PDT Received: from p-emfe01-wf.jnpr.net (172.28.145.24) by P-EMHUB02-HQ.jnpr.net (172.24.192.36) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.213.0; Wed, 23 May 2012 14:16:40 -0700 Received: from EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net ([fe80::1914:3299:33d9:e43b]) by p-emfe01-wf.jnpr.net ([fe80::d0d1:653d:5b91:a123%11]) with mapi; Wed, 23 May 2012 17:16:39 -0400 From: Thomas Nadeau To: Joan Cucchiara , "aldrin.ietf@gmail.com" , "venkat.mahalingams@gmail.com" , Kannan KV Sampath , Sami Boutros , "ppan@infinera.com" Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 17:16:37 -0400 Thread-Topic: Review for WG Adoption of draft-vkst-mpls-tp-oam-id-mib-02.txt Thread-Index: Ac05KVd9uIlVDLQ1T3KippJ4im05fg== Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <016901cd38f8$eb6063a0$6701a8c0@JoanPC> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.0.120402 acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" , "MIB Doctors \(E-mail\)" , Ross Callon Subject: Re: [mpls] Review for WG Adoption of draft-vkst-mpls-tp-oam-id-mib-02.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 21:17:06 -0000 Hi Joan! Thanks for the review. Comments inline start with TOM: On 5/23/12 11:30 AM, "Joan Cucchiara" wrote: > >Hello Authors, > >Thank you for proposing this solution. >Please see my notes below. > >Thank you, > -Joan > >1) Coherency of document: >A) Is document useful and likely to be used/useful in operational >networks? > >This document contains a MIB Module with 2 tables. The tables allow >creation of >TP IDs of MPLS LSPs and Pseudowires. Also a pointer to rows in >other MIBs Modules., i.e. to an MPLS Tunnel in the MPLS-TE-STD-MIB >(RFC3012)=20 >or >pseudowire in the PWE-STD-MIB (RFC5601). Since many vendors and >operators >support the MPLS-TE-STD-MIB and PW-STD-MIB, then one could agree with the >authors that the architecture of this MIB is a viable approach. > >In other words, the authors are leveraging off of existing MIB >implementations. >They are doing this in a way which adheres to the rules of SMIv2 and I do >think that the MIB is likely to be used/useful in operational networks. > > >B) Is document technically sound? > >From a MIB perspective, no: > >I) Many objects are of type "DisplayString" which is used >in SMIv1 but not in SMIv2. > >As the MIB Common TC doc specifies: > >https://svn.tools.ietf.org/area/ops/trac/wiki/mib-common-tcs > > > "Note 2. DisplayString does not support internationalized text. > It MUST NOT be used for objects that are required to > hold internationalized text (which is always the case > if the object is intended for use by humans [RFC2277]). > Designers SHOULD consider using SnmpAdminString, > Utf8String, or LongUtf8String for such objects." > >II) The term "Trap" is used in both the document and the MIB. >This needs to be replaced by the term "Notification". Traps a mechanism >in SNMPv1. Please see RFC3584. TOM: Ooops! We will fix this. >2) Is document ready for WG adoption? > >I would ask that changes to remove DisplayString and use a TC which >supports internationalization be done, and the term Trap removed >prior to WG adoption for reasons stated above. > >This request should only take a few minutes of editing, but will bring >the=20 >document upto SMIv2. TOM: Agree. There is no big issue fixing this. We will need to re-spin the draft in a WG-approved format anyways, so we can fix this during those edits. > >Additionally, a few comments (mostly as fyi): > >I) this MIB contains configuration (read-create) objects. > >II) the document proposes to root the MIB under mplsStdMIB which was >the convention for the set of MPLS MIBs in 2004 but guidelines have >changed since then. > >III) The use of the accessible-for-notify and imports of >IFMIB tables do not seem necessary in the MIB's current state. >As the MIB is updated, this should be removed or clarified. TOM: Cool. --Tom > > From rcallon@juniper.net Fri May 25 07:47:40 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DF6421F8674 for ; Fri, 25 May 2012 07:47:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.363 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.363 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.236, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CPDqk748kUjs for ; Fri, 25 May 2012 07:47:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from exprod7og126.obsmtp.com (exprod7og126.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.206]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0E4821F8541 for ; Fri, 25 May 2012 07:47:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from P-EMHUB01-HQ.jnpr.net ([66.129.224.36]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob126.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKT7+bhnbLAWxfgSj55IN/RFlpjAgdmTr0@postini.com; Fri, 25 May 2012 07:47:39 PDT Received: from p-emfe02-wf.jnpr.net (172.28.145.25) by P-EMHUB01-HQ.jnpr.net (172.24.192.35) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.213.0; Fri, 25 May 2012 07:46:14 -0700 Received: from EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net ([fe80::1914:3299:33d9:e43b]) by p-emfe02-wf.jnpr.net ([fe80::c126:c633:d2dc:8090%11]) with mapi; Fri, 25 May 2012 10:46:13 -0400 From: Ross Callon To: Kireeti Kompella , John E Drake , "shane@castlepoint.net" , "wim.henderickx@alcatel-lucent.com" , "lucy.yong@huawei.com" , "'mpls@ietf.org'" Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 10:46:12 -0400 Thread-Topic: IPR on draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label Thread-Index: Ac0pxlgPBEHU+CiNSMCQvlx9mAx2TAQvEyBQ Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [mpls] IPR on draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 14:47:40 -0000 Working Group and authors;=20 draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label-03 is nearly ready for WG last call.=20 Before the wg last call, we would like to check whether there is IPR=20 on the document that needs to be disclosed. Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label? If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules=20 (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). If you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to=20 this email regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant=20 IPR. The documents will not advance to the next stage until a response=20 has been received from each author and contributor. If you are on the MPLS WG email list but are not listed as an author or=20 contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any=20 IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. Thanks, Ross (as MPLS WG co-chair) From wim.henderickx@alcatel-lucent.com Fri May 25 07:53:18 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83ECE21F86C5 for ; Fri, 25 May 2012 07:53:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -9.749 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.500, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wawpQKwUsF+z for ; Fri, 25 May 2012 07:53:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smail2.alcatel.fr (smail2.alcatel.fr [64.208.49.57]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB39621F86B3 for ; Fri, 25 May 2012 07:53:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from FRMRSSXCHHUB03.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com (FRMRSSXCHHUB03.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com [135.120.45.63]) by smail2.alcatel.fr (8.14.3/8.14.3/ICT) with ESMTP id q4PEqdYp009709 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT); Fri, 25 May 2012 16:52:42 +0200 Received: from FRMRSSXCHMBSB1.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.43]) by FRMRSSXCHHUB03.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.63]) with mapi; Fri, 25 May 2012 16:52:41 +0200 From: "Henderickx, Wim (Wim)" To: Ross Callon , Kireeti Kompella , John E Drake , "shane@castlepoint.net" , "lucy.yong@huawei.com" , "'mpls@ietf.org'" Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 16:53:15 +0200 Thread-Topic: IPR on draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label Thread-Index: Ac0pxlgPBEHU+CiNSMCQvlx9mAx2TAQvEyBQAADcuwA= Message-ID: <14C7F4F06DB5814AB0DE29716C4F6D6702DF4508ED@FRMRSSXCHMBSB1.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: nl-NL, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: nl-NL, en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.69 on 155.132.188.80 Subject: Re: [mpls] IPR on draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 14:53:18 -0000 I am not aware about IPR on this -----Original Message----- From: Ross Callon [mailto:rcallon@juniper.net]=20 Sent: vrijdag 25 mei 2012 16:46 To: Kireeti Kompella; John E Drake; shane@castlepoint.net; Henderickx, Wim = (Wim); lucy.yong@huawei.com; 'mpls@ietf.org' Subject: IPR on draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label Working Group and authors;=20 draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label-03 is nearly ready for WG last call.=20 Before the wg last call, we would like to check whether there is IPR=20 on the document that needs to be disclosed. Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label? If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules=20 (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). If you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to=20 this email regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant=20 IPR. The documents will not advance to the next stage until a response=20 has been received from each author and contributor. If you are on the MPLS WG email list but are not listed as an author or=20 contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any=20 IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. Thanks, Ross (as MPLS WG co-chair) From internet-drafts@ietf.org Fri May 25 08:08:48 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12B0A21F86C3; Fri, 25 May 2012 08:08:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id J1b+AUxbDjmT; Fri, 25 May 2012 08:08:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 788CE21F858F; Fri, 25 May 2012 08:08:47 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.02 Message-ID: <20120525150847.24488.65325.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 08:08:47 -0700 Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mpls-gach-adv-02.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 15:08:48 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working= Group of the IETF. Title : MPLS Generic Associated Channel (G-ACh) Advertisement Pr= otocol Author(s) : Dan Frost Stewart Bryant Matthew Bocci Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-gach-adv-02.txt Pages : 19 Date : 2012-05-25 The MPLS Generic Associated Channel (G-ACh) provides an auxiliary logical data channel associated with a Label Switched Path (LSP), a pseudowire, or a section (link) over which a variety of protocols may flow. These protocols are commonly used to provide Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) mechanisms associated with the primary data channel. This document specifies simple procedures by which an endpoint of an LSP, pseudowire, or section may inform the other endpoints of its capabilities and configuration parameters, or other application-specific information. This information may then be used by the receiver to validate or adjust its local configuration, and by the network operator for diagnostic purposes. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-gach-adv-02.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-gach-adv-02.txt The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-gach-adv/ From jdrake@juniper.net Fri May 25 08:17:07 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F81321F86EE for ; Fri, 25 May 2012 08:17:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.600, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SOsTd2eQL+DJ for ; Fri, 25 May 2012 08:17:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from exprod7og105.obsmtp.com (exprod7og105.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.163]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF61B21F86EC for ; Fri, 25 May 2012 08:17:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from P-EMHUB01-HQ.jnpr.net ([66.129.224.36]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob105.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKT7+ibFnxSQIE8MFR7y7f+OSwM0Un+KAs@postini.com; Fri, 25 May 2012 08:17:06 PDT Received: from EMBX01-HQ.jnpr.net ([fe80::c821:7c81:f21f:8bc7]) by P-EMHUB01-HQ.jnpr.net ([fe80::fc92:eb1:759:2c72%11]) with mapi; Fri, 25 May 2012 08:15:55 -0700 From: John E Drake To: Ross Callon , Kireeti Kompella , "shane@castlepoint.net" , "wim.henderickx@alcatel-lucent.com" , "lucy.yong@huawei.com" , "'mpls@ietf.org'" Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 08:15:53 -0700 Thread-Topic: IPR on draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label Thread-Index: Ac0pxlgPBEHU+CiNSMCQvlx9mAx2TAQvEyBQAAGg7iA= Message-ID: <5E893DB832F57341992548CDBB333163A5787B4801@EMBX01-HQ.jnpr.net> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [mpls] IPR on draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 15:17:07 -0000 No IPR of which I'm aware Sent from my iPhone >-----Original Message----- >From: Ross Callon >Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 7:46 AM >To: Kireeti Kompella; John E Drake; shane@castlepoint.net; >wim.henderickx@alcatel-lucent.com; lucy.yong@huawei.com; 'mpls@ietf.org' >Subject: IPR on draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label > >Working Group and authors; > >draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label-03 is nearly ready for WG last call. > >Before the wg last call, we would like to check whether there is IPR on >the document that needs to be disclosed. > >Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label? >If so, has this IPR 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 regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant >IPR. The documents will not advance to the next stage until a response >has been received from each author and contributor. > >If you are on the MPLS WG email list but 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. > >Thanks, Ross >(as MPLS WG co-chair) From shane@castlepoint.net Fri May 25 08:28:03 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D6BC21F85E7 for ; Fri, 25 May 2012 08:28:03 -0700 (PDT) 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=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pqy0Iz+6V6Hp for ; Fri, 25 May 2012 08:28:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dog.tcb.net (dog.tcb.net [64.78.150.133]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98F2A21F8595 for ; Fri, 25 May 2012 08:28:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by dog.tcb.net (Postfix, from userid 0) id 93412268063; Fri, 25 May 2012 09:28:01 -0600 (MDT) Received: from mbpw.castlepoint.net (174-29-213-45.hlrn.qwest.net [174.29.213.45]) (authenticated-user smtp) (TLSv1/SSLv3 AES128-SHA 128/128) by dog.tcb.net with SMTP; Fri, 25 May 2012 09:28:01 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from shane@castlepoint.net) X-Avenger: version=0.7.8; receiver=dog.tcb.net; client-ip=174.29.213.45; client-port=50621; syn-fingerprint=65535:54:1:64:M1452,N,W1,N,N,T,S; data-bytes=0 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1278) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Shane Amante In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 09:27:44 -0600 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: References: To: Ross Callon X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1278) Cc: "'mpls@ietf.org'" Subject: Re: [mpls] IPR on draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 15:28:03 -0000 I am not aware of IPR related to this draft. -shane On May 25, 2012, at 8:46 AM, Ross Callon wrote: > Working Group and authors; > > draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label-03 is nearly ready for WG last call. > > Before the wg last call, we would like to check whether there is IPR > on the document that needs to be disclosed. > > Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label? > If so, has this IPR 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 regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant > IPR. The documents will not advance to the next stage until a response > has been received from each author and contributor. > > If you are on the MPLS WG email list but 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. > > Thanks, Ross > (as MPLS WG co-chair) > From kireeti@juniper.net Fri May 25 08:42:49 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CB8C21F870F for ; Fri, 25 May 2012 08:42:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VzLz3Fq4S3zM for ; Fri, 25 May 2012 08:42:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from exprod7og126.obsmtp.com (exprod7og126.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.206]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4E5721F870E for ; Fri, 25 May 2012 08:42:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from P-EMHUB03-HQ.jnpr.net ([66.129.224.36]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob126.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKT7+oVRS1+HwiFddasjCoBkpdLSfA9xKo@postini.com; Fri, 25 May 2012 08:42:48 PDT Received: from EMBX01-HQ.jnpr.net ([fe80::c821:7c81:f21f:8bc7]) by P-EMHUB03-HQ.jnpr.net ([::1]) with mapi; Fri, 25 May 2012 08:40:59 -0700 From: Kireeti Kompella To: Shane Amante Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 08:40:57 -0700 Thread-Topic: IPR on draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label Thread-Index: Ac06jMgPo5OBBmvOQgCB1Dwg0ZALrg== Message-ID: <1678F9A8-C796-4BCE-934D-40974CD3CFE7@juniper.net> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: Ross Callon , "mpls@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] IPR on draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 15:42:49 -0000 Neither am I.=20 Kireeti=20 On May 25, 2012, at 8:28, "Shane Amante" wrote: > I am not aware of IPR related to this draft. >=20 > -shane >=20 >=20 > On May 25, 2012, at 8:46 AM, Ross Callon wrote: >> Working Group and authors;=20 >>=20 >> draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label-03 is nearly ready for WG last call.=20 >>=20 >> Before the wg last call, we would like to check whether there is IPR=20 >> on the document that needs to be disclosed. >>=20 >> Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label? >> If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules=20 >> (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). >>=20 >> If you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to= =20 >> this email regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant=20 >> IPR. The documents will not advance to the next stage until a response=20 >> has been received from each author and contributor. >>=20 >> If you are on the MPLS WG email list but are not listed as an author or= =20 >> contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any= =20 >> IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. >>=20 >> Thanks, Ross >> (as MPLS WG co-chair) >>=20 >=20 From lucy.yong@huawei.com Fri May 25 08:55:41 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D7FD21F86F2 for ; Fri, 25 May 2012 08:55:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.583 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.583 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.016, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2cUfzwgV38k4 for ; Fri, 25 May 2012 08:55:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dfwrgout.huawei.com (dfwrgout.huawei.com [206.16.17.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC68621F86EF for ; Fri, 25 May 2012 08:55:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.9.243 (EHLO dfweml202-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.9.243]) by dfwrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.2.3-GA FastPath) with ESMTP id AGG47443; Fri, 25 May 2012 11:55:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from DFWEML408-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.134) by dfweml202-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.9.108) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Fri, 25 May 2012 08:53:57 -0700 Received: from DFWEML506-MBX.china.huawei.com ([10.124.31.111]) by dfweml408-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.134]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Fri, 25 May 2012 08:53:51 -0700 From: Lucy yong To: Kireeti Kompella , Shane Amante Thread-Topic: IPR on draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label Thread-Index: Ac0pxlgPBEHU+CiNSMCQvlx9mAx2TAQvEyBQABC9gQAAAHYqgAAOQpyg Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 15:53:50 +0000 Message-ID: <2691CE0099834E4A9C5044EEC662BB9D3310AC12@dfweml506-mbx> References: <1678F9A8-C796-4BCE-934D-40974CD3CFE7@juniper.net> In-Reply-To: <1678F9A8-C796-4BCE-934D-40974CD3CFE7@juniper.net> Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.47.145.209] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Cc: Ross Callon , "mpls@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] IPR on draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 15:55:41 -0000 I am not as well. Lucy -----Original Message----- From: Kireeti Kompella [mailto:kireeti@juniper.net]=20 Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 10:41 AM To: Shane Amante Cc: Ross Callon; John E Drake; wim.henderickx@alcatel-lucent.com; Lucy yong= ; mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: IPR on draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label Neither am I.=20 Kireeti=20 On May 25, 2012, at 8:28, "Shane Amante" wrote: > I am not aware of IPR related to this draft. >=20 > -shane >=20 >=20 > On May 25, 2012, at 8:46 AM, Ross Callon wrote: >> Working Group and authors;=20 >>=20 >> draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label-03 is nearly ready for WG last call.=20 >>=20 >> Before the wg last call, we would like to check whether there is IPR=20 >> on the document that needs to be disclosed. >>=20 >> Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label? >> If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules=20 >> (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). >>=20 >> If you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to= =20 >> this email regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant=20 >> IPR. The documents will not advance to the next stage until a response=20 >> has been received from each author and contributor. >>=20 >> If you are on the MPLS WG email list but are not listed as an author or= =20 >> contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any= =20 >> IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. >>=20 >> Thanks, Ross >> (as MPLS WG co-chair) >>=20 >=20 From stbryant@cisco.com Fri May 25 08:59:08 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3C8321F86F4 for ; Fri, 25 May 2012 08:59:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -110.369 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.369 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.230, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KOnCKUC6jSgE for ; Fri, 25 May 2012 08:59:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ams-iport-2.cisco.com (ams-iport-2.cisco.com [144.254.224.141]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F346E21F86FF for ; Fri, 25 May 2012 08:59:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=stbryant@cisco.com; l=1411; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1337961548; x=1339171148; h=message-id:date:from:reply-to:mime-version:to:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=YZAu6E1FmnwCpLLS6vSnZNhdw0kevNlQFyrgKbAV9Io=; b=K6D0LiL78/AAbPTAIl2LlBiRDieFlJHyqvL2j/0veyHZZSZLose2K0+V /EcRULnQx+Icy+E/atcbVq7nwvEkyZrqyJnaHBJV0bCwj85/h+AVo4zjs tyh6onC0s8Avy54u/3QQkukZ8ouHDZZc+zbm5x8XPqgnEHCVHXOWflOSC s=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EACqrv0+Q/khM/2dsb2JhbABEtRGBB4IVAQEBBAEBAQ8BAiM2BgQRCxgJFg8JAwIBAgEVMBMGAgEBHodrC5tKg0UQm36LAYIwgxYDlRiODIECYoJhgV4 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,657,1330905600"; d="scan'208";a="73648371" Received: from ams-core-3.cisco.com ([144.254.72.76]) by ams-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 25 May 2012 15:59:07 +0000 Received: from cisco.com (mrwint.cisco.com [64.103.70.36]) by ams-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q4PFx6oG010364 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 25 May 2012 15:59:06 GMT Received: from stbryant-mac2.local (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cisco.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id q4PFx5On004186; Fri, 25 May 2012 16:59:06 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <4FBFAC49.2010002@cisco.com> Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 16:59:05 +0100 From: Stewart Bryant User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120327 Thunderbird/11.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mpls@ietf.org References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [mpls] IPR on draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: stbryant@cisco.com List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 15:59:08 -0000 Given the similarity with FAT PW, this disclosure https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1595/ may well apply Stewart On 25/05/2012 15:46, Ross Callon wrote: > Working Group and authors; > > draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label-03 is nearly ready for WG last call. > > Before the wg last call, we would like to check whether there is IPR > on the document that needs to be disclosed. > > Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label? > If so, has this IPR 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 regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant > IPR. The documents will not advance to the next stage until a response > has been received from each author and contributor. > > If you are on the MPLS WG email list but 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. > > Thanks, Ross > (as MPLS WG co-chair) > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > -- For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html From adrian@olddog.co.uk Sat May 26 03:13:16 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5C1321F85BD for ; Sat, 26 May 2012 03:13:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.384 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.384 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.215, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 30fo6955W1S1 for ; Sat, 26 May 2012 03:13:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp3.iomartmail.com (asmtp3.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.159]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06F8E21F85B9 for ; Sat, 26 May 2012 03:13:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp3.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp3.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q4QADCcA031963; Sat, 26 May 2012 11:13:12 +0100 Received: from 950129200 (genkt-058-010.t-mobile.co.uk [149.254.58.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp3.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q4QAD2IQ031910 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 26 May 2012 11:13:07 +0100 From: "Adrian Farrel" To: , References: <4FBFAC49.2010002@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <4FBFAC49.2010002@cisco.com> Date: Sat, 26 May 2012 11:12:58 +0100 Message-ID: <079501cd3b28$25122850$6f3678f0$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQKyq+vS+UTZ2OooNSLRxIDtAWPDlgGHQ+5elQS9u2A= Content-Language: en-gb Subject: Re: [mpls] IPR on draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 26 May 2012 10:13:16 -0000 According to IETF IPR rules and subsequent to Stewart's comment, I have entered a third-party disclosure. This may take a few days to be processed by the Secretariat. It should result in an enquiry being sent to the legal entity that file the patent application that Stewart mentions. Cheers, Adrian > -----Original Message----- > From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of > Stewart Bryant > Sent: 25 May 2012 16:59 > To: mpls@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [mpls] IPR on draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label > > Given the similarity with FAT PW, this disclosure > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1595/ > > may well apply > > Stewart > > > > On 25/05/2012 15:46, Ross Callon wrote: > > Working Group and authors; > > > > draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label-03 is nearly ready for WG last call. > > > > Before the wg last call, we would like to check whether there is IPR > > on the document that needs to be disclosed. > > > > Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label? > > If so, has this IPR 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 regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant > > IPR. The documents will not advance to the next stage until a response > > has been received from each author and contributor. > > > > If you are on the MPLS WG email list but 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. > > > > Thanks, Ross > > (as MPLS WG co-chair) > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mpls mailing list > > mpls@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > > > -- > For corporate legal information go to: > > http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html > > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From rcallon@juniper.net Mon May 28 17:47:43 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DE5A21F8772 for ; Mon, 28 May 2012 17:47:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.517 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.517 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.081, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GrRtQmr-4lEL for ; Mon, 28 May 2012 17:47:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from exprod7og101.obsmtp.com (exprod7og101.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.155]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33EAC21F8770 for ; Mon, 28 May 2012 17:47:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from P-EMHUB03-HQ.jnpr.net ([66.129.224.36]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob101.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKT8Qcom1sTIWPBhVjbRmHxoUUlufFpLbq@postini.com; Mon, 28 May 2012 17:47:42 PDT Received: from p-emfe02-wf.jnpr.net (172.28.145.25) by P-EMHUB03-HQ.jnpr.net (172.24.192.37) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.213.0; Mon, 28 May 2012 17:47:28 -0700 Received: from EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net ([fe80::1914:3299:33d9:e43b]) by p-emfe02-wf.jnpr.net ([fe80::c126:c633:d2dc:8090%11]) with mapi; Mon, 28 May 2012 20:47:27 -0400 From: Ross Callon To: "mach@huawei.com" , "ppan@infinera.com" , "cpignata@cisco.com" , "rajiva@cisco.com" , "'mpls@ietf.org'" Date: Mon, 28 May 2012 20:47:27 -0400 Thread-Topic: Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping Thread-Index: Ac0vgcJX70M9Do4pRz++u0vZUWYe/wNsY1Rw Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_DF7F294AF4153D498141CBEFADB17704C70F9EFB06EMBX01WFjnprn_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 00:47:43 -0000 --_000_DF7F294AF4153D498141CBEFADB17704C70F9EFB06EMBX01WFjnprn_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This poll has ended, and the document has been accepted as a working group = document. Authors, please republish this document as: draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping Thanks, Ross for the MPLS WG chairs From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ros= s Callon Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 10:24 AM To: 'mpls@ietf.org' Subject: [mpls] Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping Working Group, This is to start a two week poll to see if there is support to adopt draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping as an mpls working group draft. Pleased send your comments to the mpls working group mailing list (mpls@iet= f.org). This poll ends at the end of the day May 25, 2012 Ross for the mpls wg chairs --_000_DF7F294AF4153D498141CBEFADB17704C70F9EFB06EMBX01WFjnprn_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

This poll= has ended, and the document has been accepted as a working group document.=

 =

Authors, please republish this document as:=

    = draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping

=  

Thanks, Ross=

for the MPLS WG chairs

 

=

From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-b= ounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ross Callon
Sent: Friday, Ma= y 11, 2012 10:24 AM
To: 'mpls@ietf.org'
Subject: [mpls]= Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping

=

 

Working Group,

 

This is to start = a two week poll to see if there is support to adopt

 

    draft-ch= en-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping

 <= /span>

as an mpls working group draft.

<= /div>

 

Pleased send your comments= to the mpls working group mailing list (m= pls@ietf.org).

 =

This poll ends at the end of the day May 25, 2012=

 

Ross

for the mpls wg chairs

 

= --_000_DF7F294AF4153D498141CBEFADB17704C70F9EFB06EMBX01WFjnprn_-- From mach.chen@huawei.com Mon May 28 19:55:28 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 235BC21F8758 for ; Mon, 28 May 2012 19:55:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.305 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.305 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.293, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uyBlrXrMd6yM for ; Mon, 28 May 2012 19:55:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dfwrgout.huawei.com (dfwrgout.huawei.com [206.16.17.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D5AF21F85CC for ; Mon, 28 May 2012 19:55:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.9.243 (EHLO dfweml202-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.9.243]) by dfwrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.2.3-GA FastPath) with ESMTP id AGI79962; Mon, 28 May 2012 22:55:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from DFWEML408-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.134) by dfweml202-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.9.108) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Mon, 28 May 2012 19:52:20 -0700 Received: from SZXEML434-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.72.61.62) by dfweml408-hub.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.134) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Mon, 28 May 2012 19:52:17 -0700 Received: from SZXEML511-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.3.69]) by szxeml434-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.72.61.62]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Tue, 29 May 2012 10:52:09 +0800 From: Mach Chen To: Ross Callon , "ppan@infinera.com" , "cpignata@cisco.com" , "rajiva@cisco.com" , "'mpls@ietf.org'" Thread-Topic: Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping Thread-Index: Ac0vgcJX70M9Do4pRz++u0vZUWYe/wNsY1RwAASGebA= Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 02:52:09 +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: [10.108.4.61] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_F73A3CB31E8BE34FA1BBE3C8F0CB2AE22C98FEE9SZXEML511MBXchi_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Cc: "mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 02:55:28 -0000 --_000_F73A3CB31E8BE34FA1BBE3C8F0CB2AE22C98FEE9SZXEML511MBXchi_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thanks Ross, We will resubmit the draft soon. Best regards, Mach From: Ross Callon [mailto:rcallon@juniper.net] Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 8:47 AM To: Mach Chen; ppan@infinera.com; cpignata@cisco.com; rajiva@cisco.com; 'mp= ls@ietf.org' Cc: mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org Subject: RE: Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping This poll has ended, and the document has been accepted as a working group = document. Authors, please republish this document as: draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping Thanks, Ross for the MPLS WG chairs From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ros= s Callon Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 10:24 AM To: 'mpls@ietf.org' Subject: [mpls] Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping Working Group, This is to start a two week poll to see if there is support to adopt draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping as an mpls working group draft. Pleased send your comments to the mpls working group mailing list (mpls@iet= f.org). This poll ends at the end of the day May 25, 2012 Ross for the mpls wg chairs --_000_F73A3CB31E8BE34FA1BBE3C8F0CB2AE22C98FEE9SZXEML511MBXchi_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Thanks Ros= s,

 = ;

We will re= submit the draft soon.

 = ;

Best regar= ds,

Mach<= /o:p>

 = ;

From: Ross Callon [mailto:rcallon@juniper.net]
Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 8:47 AM
To: Mach Chen; ppan@infinera.com; cpignata@cisco.com; rajiva@cisco.c= om; 'mpls@ietf.org'
Cc: mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org
Subject: RE: Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping

 

This poll = has ended, and the document has been accepted as a working group document.

 = ;

Authors, p= lease republish this document as:

 &nbs= p;  draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping

 = ;

Thanks, Ro= ss

for the MP= LS WG chairs

 = ;

From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ross Callon
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 10:24 AM
To: 'mpls@ietf.org'
Subject: [mpls] Poll on draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping<= /span>

 

Working Group,

 

This is to start a two week poll to see if there is suppor= t to adopt

 

    draft-chen-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping

 

as an mpls working group draft.

 

Pleased send your comments to the mpls working group maili= ng list (mpls@ietf.org).

 

This poll ends at the end of the day May 25, 2012

 

Ross

for the mpls wg chairs<= o:p>

 

--_000_F73A3CB31E8BE34FA1BBE3C8F0CB2AE22C98FEE9SZXEML511MBXchi_-- From internet-drafts@ietf.org Tue May 29 04:36:42 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A37C921F87A7; Tue, 29 May 2012 04:36:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yTJVNreKu2OJ; Tue, 29 May 2012 04:36:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39CD321F8627; Tue, 29 May 2012 04:36:42 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.02 Message-ID: <20120529113642.29260.33030.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 04:36:42 -0700 Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm-07.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 11:36:42 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working= Group of the IETF. Title : The Generalized TTL Security Mechanism (GTSM) for Label = Distribution Protocol (LDP) Author(s) : Carlos Pignataro Rajiv Asati Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm-07.txt Pages : 9 Date : 2012-05-29 The Generalized TTL Security Mechanism (GTSM) describes a generalized use of a packet's Time to Live (TTL) (IPv4) or Hop Limit (IPv6) to verify that the packet was sourced by a node on a connected link, thereby protecting the router's IP control-plane from CPU utilization based attacks. This technique improves security and is used by many protocols. This document defines the GTSM use for the Label Distribution Protocol (LDP). This specification uses a bit reserved in RFC 5036 and therefore updates RFC 5036. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm-07.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm-07.txt The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm/ From michelg@upperside.fr Tue May 29 07:26:06 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B57C021F86A5 for ; Tue, 29 May 2012 07:26:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.002 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Z6UgoWCSTQjs for ; Tue, 29 May 2012 07:26:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp26.msg.oleane.net (smtp26.msg.oleane.net [62.161.4.26]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 938BD21F860B for ; Tue, 29 May 2012 07:26:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from MichelGosseDel ([195.6.217.229]) (authenticated) by smtp26.msg.oleane.net (MSA) with ESMTP id q4TEQ2ce007542 for ; Tue, 29 May 2012 16:26:03 +0200 X-Oleane-Rep: REPA From: "Michel Gosse" To: Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 16:25:57 +0200 Message-ID: <004b01cd3da6$f9f57150$ede053f0$@upperside.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_004C_01CD3DB7.BD80B250" X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: Ac09prrzNGR/B1J3RvqBTYLG968nTw== Content-Language: fr X-PMX-Spam: Probability=8% X-PFSI-Info: PMX 5.5.9.395186, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.376379, Antispam-Data: 2012.5.29.141518 (no antivirus check) X-Orange-Auth: bWcyNjMtM0B1cHBlc2lkZS5mci5mdG8= Subject: [mpls] SDN & Carrier Cloud Summit: begins in 4 weeks X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 14:26:06 -0000 This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_004C_01CD3DB7.BD80B250 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit What are the architectural choices ? What could be the role of SDN and OpenFlow ? What are the service strategies of service providers and cloud providers ? Which networking solutions are proposed ? During the Carrier Cloud Summit and SDN Workshop which will be held in Novotel Paris CDG from 19 to 21 June, 2012, project leaders, manufacturers and service developers will address these aspects in detail through up to date contributions. More information: http://www.uppersideconferences.com/ ------=_NextPart_000_004C_01CD3DB7.BD80B250 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

What are the = architectural choices ?
What could be the role of SDN and = OpenFlow ?
What are the service strategies of service = providers and cloud providers ?
Which networking solutions are = proposed ?

 

During the = Carrier Cloud Summit and SDN Workshop which will be held in Novotel = Paris CDG from <= /span>19 to 21 = June, 2012, project = leaders, manufacturers and service developers will address these aspects = in detail through up to date = contributions.

 

More = information: http://www.uppersideconferences.com/

 =

------=_NextPart_000_004C_01CD3DB7.BD80B250-- From ietf-ipr@ietf.org Tue May 29 09:12:51 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3090A11E80AA; Tue, 29 May 2012 09:12:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.43 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.43 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.169, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hu6QuBbvyszn; Tue, 29 May 2012 09:12:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AAA821F8712; Tue, 29 May 2012 09:12:49 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: IETF Secretariat To: jdrake@juniper.net, kireeti@juniper.net, shane@level3.net, wim.henderickx@alcatel-lucent.com, lucy.yong@huawei.com X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.02 Message-ID: <20120529161248.15088.18491.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 09:12:48 -0700 Cc: mpls@ietf.org, rcallon@juniper.net, ipr-announce@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] IPR Disclosure: Adrian Farrel's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label-03 belonging to Cisco Systems X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 16:12:51 -0000 Dear John Drake, Kireeti Kompella, Shane Amante, Wim Henderickx, Lucy Yong: An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled "The Use of Entropy Labels in MPLS Forwarding" (draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label) was subm= itted to the IETF Secretariat on 2012-05-26 and has been posted on the "IETF Page= of Intellectual Property Rights Disclosures" (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1789/). The title of the IPR disclosure is "Adrian Farrel's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-lab= el-03 belonging to Cisco Systems.""); The IETF Secretariat From loa@pi.nu Tue May 29 19:59:33 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B804E21F86C1 for ; Tue, 29 May 2012 19:59:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OpHS7sggkxJY for ; Tue, 29 May 2012 19:59:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.pi.nu (mail.pi.nu [194.71.127.148]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE4C511E8099 for ; Tue, 29 May 2012 19:59:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.16.36.55] (unknown [122.146.68.188]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by mail.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8BF512A8003; Wed, 30 May 2012 04:59:29 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4FC58D13.6050803@pi.nu> Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 04:59:31 +0200 From: Loa Andersson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "mpls@ietf.org" , MPLS-TP ad hoc team Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [mpls] wg last call on gach-adv and ethernet-addressing drafts X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 02:59:33 -0000 Working Group, This is to start a two week working group last call on two drafts: - draft-ietf-mpls-gach-adv-02; and - draft-ietf-mpls-tp-ethernet-addressing-01 Please send comments to the mpls working group list. The working group last call ends June 15, 2012. Thanks, Loa (as MPLS WG co-chair) -- Loa Andersson email: loa.andersson@ericsson.com Sr Strategy and Standards Manager loa@pi.nu Ericsson Inc phone: +46 10 717 52 13 +46 767 72 92 13 From internet-drafts@ietf.org Tue May 29 22:36:29 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62DC821F86B5; Tue, 29 May 2012 22:36:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id g16m6pKcAcIm; Tue, 29 May 2012 22:36:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FA7721F86B1; Tue, 29 May 2012 22:36:28 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.02 Message-ID: <20120530053628.4515.56895.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 22:36:28 -0700 Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping-00.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 05:36:29 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working= Group of the IETF. Title : Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping for IPv6 Pseudowire FECs Author(s) : Mach(Guoyi) Chen Ping Pan Carlos Pignataro Rajiv Asati Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping-00.txt Pages : 9 Date : 2012-05-29 Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping and Traceroute mechanisms are commonly used to detect and isolate data plane failures in all MPLS LSPs including Pseudowire (PW) LSPs. The PW LSP Ping and Traceroute elements, however, are not specified for IPv6 address usage. This document extends the PW LSP Ping and Traceroute mechanisms so they can be used with IPv6 PWs, and updates RFC 4379. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping-00.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping-00.txt The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping/ From lmishra.ietf@yahoo.ca Wed May 30 00:43:37 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC7FC21F869F for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 00:43:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.979 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.979 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 87SUSVhyzqLA for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 00:43:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm37-vm7.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com (nm37-vm7.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com [98.138.229.135]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 9928621F866B for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 00:43:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [98.138.90.57] by nm37.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 30 May 2012 07:43:33 -0000 Received: from [98.138.89.160] by tm10.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 30 May 2012 07:43:32 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1016.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 30 May 2012 07:43:32 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 880030.17703.bm@omp1016.mail.ne1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 60665 invoked by uid 60001); 30 May 2012 07:43:32 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.ca; s=s1024; t=1338363812; bh=XLpTw7vylKrRKOOk4/QX0iCrh//AIDSojgS7EztPb/s=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=LKLzW/EqNNGPC/g6BJvprh7xEUPDYetVx6VCp+AfIn97tpmVqlFtnkL9JWWIXzr3Qf5/asOr/3jdU19VaaRGJu3TEd/XgX/ya+VpRrwDBCF5hTyEQjThaGO+9oIhZ6gT/rtoujdDLdcX+wqo3CZsfZ0Jnig4sE88jBUXnnZ/QKo= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.ca; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=TVpXeCozTn0wtHtZ93frU9/gAy0Wguz7cVB15G+jTz9KKaqFsjypWm85pkIxOQ9JP+W5oHMlCL0o66Y3NTf+75bPcHkNrPYxF6y/N1bj3k7d8/NmRZCWIaOvEBMXepVegAv1OXeZ+8WJ2meJDnrhKR5C06UTigCbYst23Q6j4fI=; X-YMail-OSG: RnB_ukoVM1kLqEE8GK_R7psg36X4eQ_tqTkYNeZ_JVZCK8. Wsmdtoppl9CaCehvWssX.birtc6xSuAXpmTaGoExQB35jvHwsyXFNabaUpvx BgGGHrUZvHiCC9NjhhESgtfLd9ulWXMDn7xq7M3fwpDxAbq0H_WBVQZKZGYt cSH3mA4o6rejEM4ohQWYZy_o31JWL7rMwLQ3DHQYKvjY8Hor8m8bsSJr3HNO OfQ2.Rg1l1..a_x7lae7C5fpQH9LZk172aaYOUy0mTAouerwMHA59Sl7Ni.d RW8E0Krgyf.Tnvj9C09sFQpYfaos05IQGMi4IBRMEOpI.mUTGZL7Y.iWA7Ue QC.YyM7hiwgUIJJ.HNOALJF6zKyN2lwYUOTcaNycfuovQ10AJ32AEhzS7PUj pvxBOcoiaGNi20AWGYM5vUJTQTP0- Received: from [122.167.32.226] by web121501.mail.ne1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 30 May 2012 00:43:32 PDT X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.118.349524 References: <4FC58D13.6050803@pi.nu> Message-ID: <1338363812.34656.YahooMailNeo@web121501.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 00:43:32 -0700 (PDT) From: Lingaraj Mishra To: Loa Andersson , "mpls@ietf.org" , MPLS-TP ad hoc team In-Reply-To: <4FC58D13.6050803@pi.nu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="1389141485-1239000106-1338363812=:34656" Subject: Re: [mpls] wg last call on gach-adv and ethernet-addressing drafts X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Lingaraj Mishra List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 07:43:37 -0000 --1389141485-1239000106-1338363812=:34656 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello,=0A=A0=0AThis is to authors of draft:draft-ietf-mpls-gach-adv-02.=0A= =A0=0AThe draft generalizes other protocol needs to be advertised in MPLS-T= P network.=0AI have read the document and have two suggestions:=0A=A0=0A1 -= The introduction section talks about GACH being used as 'Auxillary Data Ch= annel' which is never being defined in RFC5586. It says=A0GACH will be pred= ominantly used for OAMP.=0A=A0=0AThe following is with respect to ADB block= :=0A=A0=0A2 - Here we are specifying that multiple protocols will use GAP f= or their necessary purpose. So, instead of defining "Application ID", we sh= ould use "Protocol ID" which will define specific protocol identifiers. =0A= =A0=0ARegards,=0ALingaraj=0A=A0 =0A=0A________________________________=0A F= rom: Loa Andersson =0ATo: "mpls@ietf.org" ; MPLS-= TP ad hoc team =0ASent: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 8= :29:31 AM=0ASubject: [mpls] wg last call on gach-adv and ethernet-addressi= ng drafts=0A =0AWorking Group,=0A=0A=0AThis is to start a two week working= group last call on two drafts:=0A=0A- draft-ietf-mpls-gach-adv-02; and=0A-= draft-ietf-mpls-tp-ethernet-addressing-01=0A=0APlease send comments to the= mpls working group list.=0A=0AThe working group last call ends June 15, 20= 12.=0A=0A=0AThanks, Loa=0A=0A(as MPLS WG co-chair)=0A=0A-- =0A=0ALoa Anders= son=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 email: loa.andersson@er= icsson.com=0ASr Strategy and Standards Manager=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 loa@p= i.nu=0AEricsson Inc=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 phon= e: +46 10 717 52 13=0A=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 +46 767 72 92 13=0A___________________= ____________________________=0Ampls mailing list=0Ampls@ietf.org=0Ahttps://= www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --1389141485-1239000106-1338363812=:34656 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello,
 
This is to authors of dra= ft:draft-ietf-mpls-gach-adv-02.
 
<= div>The draft generalizes other protocol needs to be advertised in MP= LS-TP network.
I have read the document and have two= suggestions:
 
1 - The = introduction section talks about GACH being used as 'Auxillary Data Channel= ' which is never being defined in RFC5586. It says GACH will be predom= inantly used for OAMP.
 
The following is with respect to ADB block:
=  
2 - Here we are specifying that multiple protocols w= ill use GAP for their necessary purpose. So, instead of defining "Application ID", we should use "Protocol ID" which will define specific p= rotocol identifiers.
 
= Regards,
Lingaraj
 

Working Group= ,


This is to start a two week working group last call on two dra= fts:

- draft-ietf-mpls-gach-adv-02; and
- draft-ietf-mpls-tp-ethe= rnet-addressing-01

Please send comments to the mpls working group li= st.

The working group last call ends June 15, 2012.


Thank= s, Loa

(as MPLS WG co-chair)

--

Loa Andersson  &= nbsp;                    = email: loa.andersson@ericsson.com
Sr Strategy and= Standards Manager            loa@pi.nu
Ericsson Inc&nb= sp;                         phone: +46 10 717 52 13
         = ;                     &nb= sp;             +46 767 72 92 13
________= _______________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.orgh= ttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls


From: Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
To: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>; MP= LS-TP ad hoc team <ahmpls-tp@lists.itu.int>
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 8:29:31 AM
<= b>Subject: [mpls] wg last call on g= ach-adv and ethernet-addressing drafts
--1389141485-1239000106-1338363812=:34656-- From oabdallah@juniper.net Wed May 30 00:59:43 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EDD221F86FE for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 00:59:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.609 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.609 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.431, BAYES_00=-2.599, EXTRA_MPART_TYPE=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, SARE_GIF_ATTACH=1.42] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gQKl1i2pph88 for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 00:59:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from exprod7og105.obsmtp.com (exprod7og105.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.163]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14D1721F869F for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 00:59:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from P-EMHUB03-HQ.jnpr.net ([66.129.224.36]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob105.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKT8XTbcXXJwnZV6mRo8oOiSFzwYmiWnpi@postini.com; Wed, 30 May 2012 00:59:42 PDT Received: from emailfeemea2.jnpr.net (172.26.192.142) by P-EMHUB03-HQ.jnpr.net (172.24.192.37) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 8.3.213.0; Wed, 30 May 2012 00:58:22 -0700 Received: from emailemea2.jnpr.net ([172.26.192.135]) by emailfeemea2.jnpr.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 30 May 2012 08:58:20 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CD3E39.E5E6A8C8"; type="multipart/alternative" Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 08:57:40 +0100 Message-ID: <0F9D363001991145AC41B1E4E0308A97014C8BEC@emailemea2.jnpr.net> X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: WG subscription request Thread-Index: Ac0+OeL8Yl5DeHi5RDeEI2Z+qLzroQ== From: Osama Abdallah To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 May 2012 07:58:20.0992 (UTC) FILETIME=[FB11D400:01CD3E39] Subject: [mpls] WG subscription request X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 08:05:55 -0000 ------_=_NextPart_001_01CD3E39.E5E6A8C8 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_002_01CD3E39.E5E6A8C8" ------_=_NextPart_002_01CD3E39.E5E6A8C8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear, May I subscribe to this working group (MPLS) BR =20 =20 =20 .................................... Osama Ahmed Dogorshom Resident Consultant, Professional Services JNCIE-M #433 =20 =20 M (SA) +966549052533 M (SD) +249912311166 oabdallah@juniper.net www.TheNewNetworkIsHere.com =20 =20 =20 =20 Consider the environment, think before you print. =20 ------_=_NextPart_002_01CD3E39.E5E6A8C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear,

May I subscribe to this = working group (MPLS)

BR

 

 

 

.............= .......................

Osama Ahmed = Dogorshom
Resident Consultant, Professional Services

JNCIE-M #433

 

M (SA)&n= bsp;+966549052533<= br>M= (SD) +249912311166<= br>o= abdallah@juniper.net<= br>www.TheNewNetworkIsHere.com

 3D"cid:image003.jpg@01CC37D7.8C9ABFF0"3D"cid:image004.jpg@01CC37D7.8C9ABFF0"3DTwitter3D"cid:image006.jpg@01CC37D7.8C9ABFF0"3D"cid:image007.jpg@01CC37D7.8C9ABFF0"

Consider the environment, think before you print.

 

------_=_NextPart_002_01CD3E39.E5E6A8C8-- ------_=_NextPart_001_01CD3E39.E5E6A8C8 Content-Type: image/gif; name="image001.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: Content-Description: image001.gif Content-Location: image001.gif R0lGODlhhQAmAPf/AOzw82NjY8zMzMbGxjg4OBQUFJiYmM/X35aWltPT05mqu7KyssnJyXh4eO/v 73Z2dubr7+Tk5Pr7/Lm5ueHh4YCAgH5+ftjY2LCwsA0NDTU1NaysrKi3xc7Ozvv8/aampvb4+aCw wFBQUO/y9TY2Ni4uLlhYWAICAlZWVtDY4MfQ2iEhIV5eXoSEhJ6enpqamtvb27C9yykpKcrT3Ke2 xMjR2srKyvDz9oeHh729vUxMTEFBQVxcXGpqaoKCglpaWqa1xNXc40lJSWVlZSUlJWBgYEpKSsLN 1hkZGb/K1KGhobnF0HFxcZycnD4+PhAQEKKywZ+vv4uLi05OTuXp7R0dHdPa4TIyMsTN17vG0rjE zzw8PB4eHhISEicnJwgICCIiIvv7+9TU1JGRkZCQkPj4+NHR0fDw8LW1tevr621tbZSUlI2NjXV1 dURERFRUVPPz8/39/ejo6P7+/qWlpcPDw/n6+29vb4iIiOzs7Pb29urq6vr6+rK/zOfn57fDz+Pj 47TAzbXBzdzi6EVFRfj5+qSzwvHx8fn5+b3I0/Dy9bG+y/L09vT2+JOTk/z9/dLZ4fP19/X19fDz 9e3t7TAwMNvh5/z8/I+Pj6SkpLO/zKW0w/L095KSksnS27rG0aq4xvLy8nNzc6mpqcLCwoyMjNbW 1qy6yPz8/VVVVW5ubqioqI6Ojq68ya+8ycTO2NXV1dDQ0K67yc3V3ert8a27yKy6x8bP2cHBwfj5 +/H09v39/vL19+7x9NTb4nx8fL6+vlNTU6urqzo6OrbCzrbDz5WVlUdHR+bm5uLi4mhoaK27yeDl 6ru7u3R0dPr7+8zV3cXO2OLn683V3s3W3oebsNrg5srT27XCztPb4pytvuzv8rzH0vHz9ujr76u4 x6Ojo93j6e3w866ursDL1bPAzN/f36GxwNbd5N/k6re3t97j6enp6bbCz+vu8rTBza+9yejs8LS0 tK26yJeoueHm693j6Nzc3K+8yqq5xpqrvKu5x/X2+PX3+AAAAP///yH5BAEAAP8ALAAAAACFACYA AAj/AP8JHEiwoMGDCBMqXMiwocOHEA3yAQSIj8A4yADBeZgG0BmEeQYowSPqDpMWLnD5SUhpj56B evakmUmTpsxQcR6aWmWBhQgRAUpNoNQwArAmLZjccbZAYYIMGUwJPLQig4GHOjL8MmjDRAF/YMOG faIDjcEwGp5cFWigS5cncOPKRVLCRCaLCV8QOCFWLJIechIuEJKhrz8hCmOBTSDwzBN/nR7u8Ceq oIEvYDOU0MEigM8rj8E6yzkwzAp/rAZiMsw6LIEOByMcA3uiEo8GLSrc0YEELBgBBuM0CNuFhIgi AXiwUWjG3wkxjb+ueejGXxuCwMA+wUPhILIXXMDi/yEYhog/MgPH+JNRp71796QWNJABtgBjgntK gGVxv6ADMo9xsUdB6vmzgguBPdTcc9H5M51D1V0n0CVO+IMELAv5QYA/TyT4T3nnpecPAQwhggdY TpAmkAjOrbIQA4UVQdAhvRGwUkQLQvfPGdJRZ91Aivmz1kIC8BWZQCCiJ5B6GjjUBlgMDIQLWEMq dGIGEQy0gHMDRCRQjg0+2FCEA7ngTwY3MqSBPyiUZp6S/zDpUBqP4TCQCSM6dMhXmQykij8lePml czry6KCPEv5TgT+VzOFQAP4M42aIS/rTpEMVmiCQHI+98NBsdwzE4huC/gPmjj1C+KNAd/hjxEOL yv/g6IdvinhpQzz444RAzTgHw0Ot6jDQZMqUeqqhYjJEpkDK+BPMQ6X4AwZeSdr6EAu6CuTIemE8 JEWeAm2ohrGEhonoQJCS6hAbBpaBZK2V3sqQEP6kItBwIkCUyXqXhOvPuIIem+qYq/6T7kPsruAu rZTGaalDZYTng0CQ7oDGxRhnrDEaD/hDxMLikssgqoeqmujB67b7bsNyNrQKWKQIhGdrNIOFxEv/ hBxwuSQnu9CyBvujbkMJL1xtpSQ0xEBvJSAiEAr+FKDB1FRXbTXVU4D8r8iFDqxswSgTrTLDcKp3 BRxop612GgJUUNgJEwz0gz89lOovwF4KXDLBJwv/jfDYRzv8RRWEF254F2FlsAFBQ/jDgt05b73z yHvu/XXfQzNU9Mpl1xzWCSv0oONAwwlrt8558xxKb8Y8RIg/D6Drd8oKcy4iGHTkrvvu8piCc0Hb eoGXoKjjyLMep42HqT8WyJ75QpuTLSKJgvZ6AoalFg/RqXHop4pDfJiHifN/1y59vKVy6o8jp0ue +sj/0LtrQzDwNQ75tBsNr8PyRoRno9lzn/GuNxAc+OMLo1NIC5xzD/yJzXyBa5mgSAEWOznEAQTR 3kM64JwLDCQZhXGChxAygMeYjmKze6D+WPYwu6UCLEdSCAVQcIU8DAR1l2BHt5R2QHMQZFH+4IIL /wBxlgv8AjMnAI4DNQe4/UlQUA4gAVgIkYONFOQSsGhAaEZxQ8mFYQFKEIbTGCIMf3TBhqURReJK IAQTmCAVbvACX6LmIoIUwR/5csi3qmC006RGIKu5AuT+kYdcgaUKhCiCKu4wBB3QByzDUIeKpFg3 Qm4AAR9Ik0KYwC2DTEAEX2kNF4bwq4Ko4QmPc8ganlACo4FmSAZ4wg4GKZBPhtIwXdDBKFQkEEI8 IXb/QMQCFrCB3yVEEuHRFEL2MIAPYCI3LXDEBjpgRYMcQg4fcYgk5JCGWf0jDXKQxEC2SRRaCiQk mWBFBSpQCnDUIQ0IoYQcQjEQRFDAmAgpA6T8kf8Dc/rznwAVVBiSMYoNOSug5szFQOagUA/w4gaK UMQuGjECXURCEZNAhR0G4oFZzWGj/2AEBMTBUV5gFKQSeMRFQCAQcUCAEw35ASG2IAPMgEUE2USo 3XahgBQIpB+u+Ac1zrGMWriCH7eYhyEU0IpWjIAYjRAIDXwhkANYYQ6aAMIfarGJEfxjFufoQwwM YYV/JMIS/yjEKSDwCLFygwavYMgc66ODD+iUlmGIwjlo8Y9GAOEf0aBqQQaxiIEkIgghpQcxBGIL XdTgDyr9ByRO8Y9XQEMg3aDBP/5gjX9oArFUkIVA5hDVhRgDDwjAgADQeNdB2uEUgzDEI0Cg2Rr/ 1GAEI1DErAbRh4GkAx//SMEMBGGHXoDiH6BgBEFsAYIaHEAgEtDsEiyxCE8IZBIhQEcvvNna7hrE Dn+dQRLiwIF/eMIQWvhDFgohEN4ORAKGsEM7IoEFZkBiBv/gAHsHUg4AQCMEf9AEKKjxD25oIwaf GEg8yCGIfODXuxAeCHif8Y9lQCOoKkDsYHtr2FsUlhmJ+AQA/vGNSRBkH4XwxCeksYRiCKQYgfjH OyBREEZAga8RhrAdDMFeTuhDG4ClcUEsAQ+CUKEa1/iHB/Sh2X/UQBASqGorKjuLf6BiE9v4BzY6 G4kodCMS7rgIB7yRYwhLIBAU/oc9NAsJDgTiN83dEEg9EkGQK5P0H0u4xUWSIAtBLGIRMJ1GNgSy Diz84wjhEIglXiGOPgjiDzFQQZknTWlaBgQAOw== ------_=_NextPart_001_01CD3E39.E5E6A8C8 Content-Type: image/png; name="image002.png" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: Content-Description: image002.png Content-Location: image002.png iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAGIAAAAuCAIAAABcXVtOAAAAAXNSR0IArs4c6QAAAAlwSFlzAAAO xAAADsQBlSsOGwAADyhJREFUaEPtW09oHNcZn7RbmC0SzEJFZw+BnUCDxpBiCVosHwoW9GD5lIgS 4pyMTsFQKC4FRznk4KQXt4VSFwpdclIKASlQiHRb3SSftIKAV2DICBKYoTnMFAVmDgL39/15b97s rv64lEKdju3Zt2/f+973/b7f973vza5fevbsmff/6yIEXjoLpqryvKooqsr3fDR9nzo8vEPb4zZe 6arolfvrNr3LPa+DD/nT3PPRrnyS4rSL3As6XlH5AfX7ficvqg7aRe4HdZvGyFwZ35DjyrftripI ugXUhg14ISXZFBGBN9LlBwGrT11q1Dhs4zCR/UWVVkUUBCxS7H/BL8ErKYou7FXQGiaPw1QUmR+E 3wpsprmeQ2gKAjVMxKOs8MPgBWfOJcwrsiJo4vAdOwuJyHvxMeKketEFrhRAw7kMTJXms4sk/E9+ jtSTZEVynBUOSucAxqme/thLg05ymOT6F+6qhlnR/3QPdt+7uRT3ItnvLjTTHWTZhF3z4pkXiv4v DLhU2DT0QClBWzYlXdQldF3OUil7+DJsuuzUxvrgINFw2g56Fl6Ieeicm8iHIrQHYxeGHbWfzvM2 SrlcFobOXLN0IAAoTLiZhpDQanhcbO7uYeG1mwsLvUj6ubY6r+CBptYys9PJzOe5sizb+NvG6Gmy 9ou3l24sXTC18oZZlibpCMpWZVJkFPtcbgZBADuDsBt1/G6vGwfk9anXCBKO8xEwLvKUt25RGrtS 5Le7URAH3cjsQhi0d5ymGAdAinyUFVgx6nW7gV96XrvySmBcebduLIRnGF5VhVDQYZPWpc+B0+hw uPbO3f3H+3/681/vvrN2zkx4b/so2dsfJXBGVXYDVNowLmizP0ENmJRydQ6Vl5cWlil9jF/bh6O9 YULWeiRBrcUbz+fpyK1l1ItW42hhnqZjZH9nMHyak6FzEmZYsORAwq3jn+Sp5/V/uRqH4VTlQVvL 0JaOeH42wZFtry2sPh/d7cNkc38IQ673gjhe6PodkLlNFqrK8HaSFptHo9FxlWX70Z12FDRU//jx cLA7yr3yei+K4wjcQYzZTAx70izfG6XJUdIvCngMSEW+vwrEY6JslmZ7WYrTxcK1RXAWSOOEIUeX 7tnkdRO9gemc0edgAJT4fHTOEGzCB0SjcvlqtLIU4ww0ZXAYLMx7URQ82hniWLe1e3Dv9RU7bP84 +2z3wPPbq1evgGtTY2ShF0ZhZ2voHYC2SRL14IlgKVBWJmHnyU5aBP5yjKiczp0pWjlm6U4nB9vn umhCCQ7rofisuQlc6VUdv728ABwsRlOWQ3IFjoidvWP4u742d/Yqv73YC9+4sXRWHsHouBeuxBHi MTkuRsc4eDsXbTR8+K37LmGvM1xhusSkcRzI4nabIu5cNqXIs0UV9ULa0S663rgakyZVaQvBJMuG RY65b9+4fuF8ZOioFyRFZXdSWZD3irGqUGL2vMvdBZ26ieSZi9qywpmyyOPMpnPGkISS0iZh2oDp TJP9E6868aydw1GKuUiloSajJktER9MXeH7U6XgnZZLzqcKOlSbd3HWbOvD4BgCO6SboOBxUGAFt 5uhMnk97uAyRBatLsYkmlp1u90IuiFHFrBfMthM8WmJ9RlmKrWIx7k71u8isJXP9Vc22MRNedPq5 SXZxMPI5REove+OMrsAojxyNTdDVpx27cVkPGGB4banrFDFmE5Uvxg+Mr7rE8JH2YDhBntwZtHWK 0bn2PUYVpLHaBVqgxpHHZrXhjp/HYwcmnvCu7xKjIHYh/5pVLdekg1dzzFUi1ph4lk2kSLMmFQ9o f/1GnMSWlB5yE4WEtQFr2Swg64pXoaOPfZv3WOqnLUN15qCtUSN5XolZonmKUjLwsrwaHCb8d7R/ ONw+Gg0ej1BJDQ6H0sn9o8FRkmDDmEO5ytlADIDRAcoPzlB8F7OMGfRo07bNY0weY5yDtmUTKUY2 1Ze4jO/arz144cIQVRP7TU8e8imndEJE5lIZyxjQs1Sue2k2Uauw2S9AJaOTGdPiayDFK1RV9nXZ qbzNw/TjncGjT/b7O8OHu8nGzt6j3T2+J326D7l/2P90sP34CSKLsjgKJdaBcCH5ZqfTfMLIaJSp gjKa9JP4cNBo5CYuze3Opd6gLsbecI2wF/wNm2gafawX8YvqV3Ye4ykyuU2TaTQ7UZYQ+aaN2bOI M+GgnFe9lfnu8rXF1Z/Ht67Fq1cjal9bvIX71S7fI+mnNv29guKjo1urnHsJ92ZksF8cvrAC1EkK cr85qNBALS9xXsAJVg9JwJLG2pBVC7Gvi7VsGd0Mm+hNmiXbO4P08wR1IHb06LUrt26shD0F3uYa 3hqkCjYYGlZZtAq/VBehvMbZuPKWl1BzhZxfeNT4nSOL+vmP4S/bIRWTsInpQWwyJwexVC9SS6cW 8lUDznShfDjGJp5Ephn3Ci4avCTd7gJElw6ygPoEx63fvfveB3/44IPf0v3RHx+mRcKCpLYSdohg SQ/yzyEvZy1WtlPxQQaL3Xqti80p0XIRGIgDBRFSgeeYb0okpikf0Z3s4LNUFRBIxHXTw03iGC+i TqHkwvYKjxASCuBEblKmkKcLNoOxJx6xSRBj+9FX5bSDSG66EoXrHz54cP/Bgw8f4n73N7+W45KP sumE9GZ7xNNgLWQar1MGlzZbcYLVcjryMR44GKNJ65sNnDO+ZjnOIWwkXE9jpMl8qfc1zU3cT7WC jKGXgrzEO4jwiyiEfVVyk/uYd5JNirrkKfaAbMjaRr/kGnRxbqJvbAj7XrR2Z239w/X1+/dwX3vr dsgH/QJsmiWoSYbkK7qTerV3tc3KoW7CYiXdoH8cdkGsUZpijkjQhEANnOANTvK8if4Rg2guZ0dm lmrLi+OBAlOE7rSpCLdN9iQ2kQNppUZuatRNUIvRlZi2d31jnaQBTU8IsNPxJHUi+VQcb30bUBFO ahQ0hseCO2wdu1R5pBmDTSBkJYn7Hg5p3tflk+OMvlo19vFyHHfUJVKYEyJRoFPCcM4CKXVxsMmG udoo+rMCgIfN5ksCQK5m3STOZgI5d8MvDnO7P5GOHa6b6szFxwoeQwuq32QMZW3mEWltOEUY8XvN IeJmjDQq+tfno/ZcG08itoYJs0P+sXYqh8kjSvCNY1g6RFvgBtQlf4FNpKESzVgkIu1WLNDIcg2Y DPQiRM/TTFjdKcQ9tBLdGWzIzbXeJaH1p5yJyLvCMuQmUpgIzU5jobxbie/V0cIsyk30ZFEUZQEr Swt46oZ6cuvxkPHTTMfSZNdTSJDDBkfp1u4o41WYqcrYAM//MqqnlE0KIwsTfvGdRxs2FRYlwybD CDbD5AzDHVpPOCI6if3kMdnpDGoOUupztpVyE7tPdTAJz3KKpTHLCNVZiUPhBY1ZuRZf71GNsLl7 sHG4j++R8PgKO4lYgSyMeIT9o+MEdebGzuCz49HBMeUy5iiZ3g1DemDqtwf7o+2jdEQSCjx7ENSU Rwy1eFLhCWqYmk8vm3OUWoyL4VFNcEgr+VGz+JwGGRzVw8wPPJAjHnEUYV3mj8aLthkLTQkQf1IV s4y+7fe9268vb+0c4Lnt4O9PtmeTOAzkOS9tXKWXZDmeKOC0jFndsLsYduIeHZXtWlh3IY5w7sFT nf4ng2quHXFYekW+fmc1Cp2VtLQQLmsoo/3d999/Hy+nrRYBxreK7tUp+xP9sKDl+9RFbc+XkZ43 HA7/0u8HMzOrb74ZxzFPxtAWS9c2Rmb/rFrVNz/+0csvB7OQ5nunPKaFwrYl7dNTTG21qoqV+Pwf 37wSzETdOTyNJDtbp5XXmmv5i3jw+T2v/f1Zf8YrTquvsi+fZsXTr758khXfnJ7iqfGrwVw8/8qb C6/+7Cdxh31HUJDIU+gWzbTn5uZg0uwPZ37gtzr4yQveBLM/jeY6M4G17pQ014ummXfO15k2nwl3 1BuGRyZ3igx8rfLeu+/1P+ovXVva+KgfzceSOU3c1bUy8gXiApldY1Y/EQYJR208km2yV/JOT9uA kMrxK7hDX2KlzB1ekQZEYZse60pasZqwzsJxjWiSX8gb6aOaYFJzttH9AsrD75twlc073nJPKf32 KsvyizT9bGvz9lu3Ba8H99fdz2sxOtUVw1260mQ/f+isVxoVnFlNbcbfyWyRI2vRHXKm2lIbxXNc BOSj3NHGwJQ3gLJryBJp+sW9X91bv7+Ob5xWbq7AbYLR3Tt3gZrqo5o564mheocgY68C4Hw6hp6C PYHqmEdlRQXGwFOvOKlJjZ1iZNBkKeNAlXluoVSYcqdrjFkYure/ZwKWXgHT8s2Vh79/qBjVizTY UDPD1cahqZqpvrZUsMCqnVa8gUU6HI40mjWnDPiNyHD4JSRqcM2NHpdNzdwkYJhMwDsFZXv83qf/ 6QYohDjHl/D4hhbflXXn8S2Is3NptOtkifzxu2SByX7To+vXczWpnCfHlTlNvmQrm5s0ExnNJU1J 4eTmLO6VFM3XZLg7bBrPTVNyg0sJk9GcYXU+MqEmYTJONZkyHqZG0JS5KnhS2Yl8ZIxwMtQkg2zI OYo5ZozD1MihGvcmbt2c0jTLvDOZYjIjuobaYHByzfkS3FiYzAl1BpyU7M6sQa/HjX9u3rsRh3n1 r+VkLzYkkzrYOZdw28SLFqpaW+subPZ1Jqns5TKeDxhKXi4zL2jzJGfUtPHjYyZ104pXY84W1xxa xi4+/cliqhjrSTjYWpw/bf72kmoW+omIo2VDYUFKLhPv/357ev46O3O54/9TOoxbys82yMfNXyPV bCL7A0IB9SBdDbezNOMxixH5gX2hdaCO4i7pF58oOZz2mf3GA1Z99fXFclQHVx9miNXNotzQXxbk EzLsxvMafhYmGb2+Jn7wTHyj82Qg3OMDNCrVuo0fynDti3E0xtbIdU3t1tdT2lCKSl/eXhrC+WdX upDbdhQwm5Kt3y9YS+t31i1gu0h3fqpDbVcB7g95Nyc+2KhhrKb8LwNBVkKYX+Q8wHaJFNtP72Uz de+Skxr9cijRdEdtOC0wdxHAPXj6i3PKZHvKeKNIvfqUde1Gr26RDMvJknQ0zzsIEz2e8eFlDCR8 OmWPt7sYV86040+524OAfCYFn9OWHnO3pwdbGZZc9+sQaXOJq/1uW8SY8ZMyHUFOnT2mj+hW2+K2 1cYzoXj27Mz/szKe277d7/8FqY64J+xaVUYAAAAASUVORK5CYII= ------_=_NextPart_001_01CD3E39.E5E6A8C8 Content-Type: image/png; name="image003.png" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: Content-Description: image003.png Content-Location: image003.png iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAC4AAAAuCAIAAADY27xgAAAAAXNSR0IArs4c6QAAAAlwSFlzAAAO xAAADsQBlSsOGwAACQVJREFUWEe9WD2IHdcVPk51X2GYKQzvdfs6bRHwusqq2wUXMqSIBG5EXFix ixBXThXbKYKdysYQsAOJ14YE25VWVaTCIBWGfQHBmwXBzoLBs6BiBlTMBRdzO+X7zjl33q6s1Uas 7Nm38+bduffc73znd+a5hw8fyo+OmFKIMYoEkSQhSEo6J+AS9woO4DrFFAqc+6IoY74ORZkwnbd9 KdaaHKwagsxwqyh+vOlzj0ABgD72ZVFiNtY/24P6EKYkqBnClDusNllB4Yyug7LTx0F+tpgISVmf hmIEs4KCWynovZ/rIBru6Nz8wvdNqU/pKXAk2P68B30AnpdpcShdSiXRnXrE2HURs9zcXergs+fF gvXFFIJNTmaF/v8k07Rd3yyWMcG+9LyD6qDtmvNDgeP2aTgJJRxz5cftgABsRfqux02A6GIsp+X5 oUBCmY0x+opDO036bDrDkrZtwUnT9rguiikZslg4ZiyOWBpKzEFn+tQgE0tbGUoxebKKYCWUZdd1 ddfCuvQ4Xd/sV7ervdt3btaHtSFrDutqv2JmSN1ysddEd4XT5GNjZJAVlIA4PutAloRd60WF87ws kaOA6eZiL3axl3Tz1k1YLSSp6/qgPkDu6o/a6rBKHQz7pAPmMK2clf8nGMq1OfDWXZNiV05nWLxX H6TYbm5tX9na7lPfVEvN8DnMmPvPtA/MM5xgRak940AWnhTlcB8VB5cMtwQ+HiSwRb95kFrmTxVk vuPxdopYdyiBr6xY0ep1FhC9X6ie87UZSyRtTApMiWOOO7Ca6l3gO01FllOFTSdd+UoIQ/QI8hSm kaHXOn0U6HsTEY4h9sjRxgTiyHblyANwzlWwmgyM/xxUpjAnqu4Ew41HX+FooCPrNErUnRQ1843W ehfCRTbuODVB4dfgkCgGXmxxAGGDhWbmwH54fQajRDwcYwV348DhSHyQCTiQAj0TvqiyuxJB6Rzn iXNiYZrGBiRREkUQ6zAoPCXFDKky8c+cbX0CvCQ9Lq8kUakASkJMb3MHZissF8RnExviU/nrL27g 7s6N6199sYPb87V1s2bTtRjZ+edOe1SjeHFfjlN0lkxX8QYMJhp9hetRrc0BdEK2AqdopLFpw03k q+ViiZ0wAOkXNy8i6f7h93+8+vrvEEUv4Wekd+ze2P3wHzvwyBqJmVSZHIej3ko6cn84Mdf3fgVp FPEJoOb8roKq7lK4HL1jbGOaI5Ix17w1pXq/QlUrL2zoGJlvumZWzACO+a0oOY4/cmuLMiZOD81h M78wX0FpDrvZ2lQnOie2iES5HFzTd0Ia0OzBE6SlsTkyg10n0sNZ4UchQaVygsgIGNQ6FadsTx24 1l21Q2JHmcg0UOOPrIBsOBPSFNDDpU4U6axG+OIT+dd1eoylg1E9ox29H/xnXko/CGoCcjH2fgHF Qbe938qvX5FL2xYwyorybawcdfM1ImbiR7YcYHnt6y14ybzayX3t6y/lbzty1HA/oKH2mAo31z4h QWNcB6kOeAvVG60M3XyQ6VRe3JTXrmJt+m+VU8AqHrGQWUTDwGvQBBy7axITfuFjyPEUIncrWV+X RSXtgdRLab6XW/8hE/BR+kGSLspf35Wq9kzQ9oJ69G0l3yzk24U0bLICaqSGITCrmkZKGGBKDI1Q yMrIhzJOQ1FjWG8QdEzA3bDeKgLs3WkKUnro/72UM5mqQ4xGAIJqT/b35O6e3GMLYTma/qZfJh7Z dcUKdoOXK1BNKiZszLNIDBhoarl8RT7+iNNevya/uUye5uvUDTEcZp701meysWEZQWYzvVXI/lKN Cz8zpml8Y8KS8IoV+Eqv7pizqnmWeg4OeKJ5Kz7W/2K4mMtXX8pvL8uslM8/EyBABOHYvc7xS9uc +emH8uln8vkn8qttdDHyXSNdy/xk3DAr83viiWzlK5Zy3Iq6n6kA/iZ+zTplB0bMLoaLOvrPP71P hV7elq2LcmFDPv5A0N29ekWmc0GuK5R1k5y/UIPskm4LkVotHK/Hm+7kpuI19j7W/46p0jNizpw3 dqVTrM+X9Kf7A0l1wyD6lAen20iB0x7vbVWums70dCtqrcKYhonyk7OCVQ3cROZQiaosP/BcFExM /EEjGWG1+ZLUaHUV0OqZPrNuYkZWrDCNns+eijPwxsCc2VAbZwYWI3Y9ZDOpayl3PIZBnp/Qw/7y Pj93l0xImoT0BUSWrxTZXm4gU8u2s9m0hurtKhsHpoEddhNnbXKZEEkMaMJ+yPigRVHCUX45Z6q1 ZMizvQ7JvhJA9SOV2fxAddVOU2dbOSbnhhFrsuca7s1tefOagzOUb73N2GlauYcUEOTP78rWK5r3 UBcVtLJLh/AAgtCTvjIJeGS24FXUnld0LR6RoDrEQad7S7mzYCzg961dmgBZFU89fcvzndtMpTh/ c53jKBc4kOj+jYZB5AVjwjOWsY6R8TkoNwlH3RQ1SX3c4pITlUly//ePBP2HkpU1i64l1cWK0Wpq oxaZXmfONd8glOZzee8d2dqmPLW+CSJUlEMl3msQCoHZ3hGo9ZUhFXnpqlxCNlOQ/ERiQi8S9Qne CiS0sGqAvKxr+UFmw13geOMaMq8BpkaekwyMPwc5K81Rg5de9nSjgW+osq74xjZg/sge9Xr5Qb/Z LOo0nABGKV8FNoLIRtB3ar+n0aDZMUtHzm2T9mJh7OJiRJM8X2M3pcDVGL7GxGvIaAZSDizksi/T 6zVqaHqcS59pMLF6ZZAsTTdqug4LpshAY0PJLhBQ9G2gk+FMuh4jR+Pd81+w82e+YScLaflNAt4T hAnQ6Ms6P3jfmBx97Pz7ZwmohnjLiuKFmLMjvxZk7CQ8A7epnyFog3aXPwECtbNWZfCBSq9d7Uko anZFSrPjEdNykYa9XpMb5CLoUWqNxXviHlRCM74z1rPlQBvXOWMKz8USNYueRGElzIAv2uYxUAgB 5rEqaHD8KdNi21KgJeH87pp5L6PRa7zTs7zk+VR9exVbkImkG9EiEcdonOMGWjmBAuEzhUWdx1GO HStnuahRbYo9edYg81jLfLgc7SW9C3jU/I++WH92fvnUknIEPfXCZ7/gfx1zpDZoJt1sAAAAAElF TkSuQmCC ------_=_NextPart_001_01CD3E39.E5E6A8C8 Content-Type: image/jpeg; name="image004.jpg" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: Content-Description: image004.jpg Content-Location: image004.jpg /9j/4AAQSkZJRgABAgAAZABkAAD/7AARRHVja3kAAQAEAAAAZAAA/+4ADkFkb2JlAGTAAAAAAf/b AIQAAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQICAgICAgICAgIC AwMDAwMDAwMDAwEBAQEBAQECAQECAgIBAgIDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMD AwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMD/8AAEQgAMAAwAwERAAIRAQMRAf/EALUAAAICAgMAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAcIBQkDBgIECgEAAgIDAQEAAAAAAAAAAAAABgcFCAECAwQJEAABBAECBAMCCwkBAAAAAAACAQME BQYRBwAhEggxExYiMkFRcaGxIxQkFSUJgZFCYnIzlFbWFxEAAgEDAQQGAwcQCwEAAAAAAQIDEQQF BgAhEgcxQVEiEwjTFBdxgTJytBUWYZGx0UJSktIjM3NklEWVGMGiU2M0VDWFtSZGJ//aAAwDAQAC EQMRAD8A9THdtvxdTcyvsHr7adVYhhaVTF3Aqpb8Cxyu+uI702LWPzo6i5Hpo0JlSeQSQi0JNFXo JuwHK7SNnJjUzlzEkt/cvIIi6hkhjiIRpAp3NIXNFqKCgNekGm/P/mXk7bOTaTsJ5LfEWMcJuBEz Ry3M06mSOEyLQpCsQDPwkFqkUPdKp1glNk+5l+GOYNt/Fv7d0DkmwxNyEWokRDQCmWVhJyViHCii ZoKuOmCEaoiakqJw4MveY7AWXr2WvGhtgaVKxVY/eooiLMfqAGg3ndv2rRpuwzWscqMTpvFpdX7A sQHnoq1oXkdrhURakDiYgEmgqTTYm7i7Ibs7V1HqDLts6UaEFaCVb015d3MOuN0hbbSz+yZIsiC2 TpoCOm2jKmqJ16qmsDg9Xaa1FdepY2/l9cNaI8caM1N54KxUY030B4qb6bF+reXOu9E2HzpncPbj GAgNLFNNMkZO4eJw3HEgJIHEV4KkDiqRsDFyOL/rlP8A5eTf9DwX+pP/AG8v4MXotln89Rf5WD8O 49PthXJogkhLjtRohIvszcmEuS/wl6hLRfiXnpxt6jIRTx5PwYvRbY+eoQQfVYOn7+4B+v4+7Z8e 0rfe7g5nQ4RPtp1rh+ZpaxqavtZb9hYYnfU0ZqfKr40+QpOyKeRDeQmUIlIdRTQVQycRvNHSNlHj ZM5bRJFkLZ4xKUUKk0crFFcqNyyB9zUFDUnfuC2z5AcyspcZ2HSl7PJcYe+jmNusrmSW2mt1EkkQ kapaFoyWSpJWgFB3iyl9y9lGLeHeiIEpg5MfN8KF+OLzavtK7iNs60jjPV5g9bRIQ6pzTg85WI30 QxjEHhMV5vp+tDZL+Ya6i9pufhVlMq3GMqKiorjyRUfVG/Z5OwtiJV7JbhZRHaRm3nZ0NVLnjykl X19XRrEjgfvNgydtIIdPAnVXx4AObhku9X2OOkPFapZl1Xq4maSpI668Cj3BTZw+XNocZytzGegH BkJMmImkHwvDRIAqg9Ip4shFOgsSN+zj1EiBlMe/xm0Rp6muaGwhToc1wnIr7csRiOIqSXDVFcZk kh6e94+Ka8LfIQT40wZG3qLuKdSrKKMKd4fBA6CBTs9/Z1aayNrnnvMHelTi7iykV0diUPEQn3ZO 8qzcVDv3E7xXaudf099wNOkNzNvy01QEJu61VPAUJUZJdfDVdF4dHtqxHScfff1Pt7Vn/lX1KBRM 3iD2fnfe6tlM3j2Zz7ZG9j0uawY6N2LTz9LeVbzkuluWI5AEhYchxph5qTGVwPNYebbdBDFdFEhJ WLpjVWG1ZZtdYl24kIEkbgCRCejiFSCDQ0YEg0IrUEbJDX/L7VHLfJpjtRxJwTKWhmjJaGYKQG4W IBDLUcSMqsKg0KkE7R2z2EYd39mIhymAkyM3zQWY5PNo+75WI1LriNtdXmF0Noqly5JwMc042+iG TYA8Iis6nq/xR2PvLzcx+0zARMyiRrjJ0FRU0x4JoOncN+y7d6kRXN/t/XQ1E/X22ioYqomiht9c pqJCqKmnE/ydNNE4of3N78rGy281C/8A13UrDp9axG//AGs7WKfp7T5ULtA3JlPyn3jj7syxacfd N4gbKqwQEbEnSNUBFNeXhz4XvNOBJuaGPiAFGx46PjXHZs7PLzez23lxztyzsXTObiTWgK2Ipvru 37MfT219fSTiUcKTaS2WVkmxDYbddbYEwbV4k1TQEcdFNfjVOIe9tcfj4hNfOsULNwgsSATQmn1g dpjEX2fzlybXCwy3V2icZWNQWCggcXuVIHukbbO5WbluigHjN4Y/AJRGtPnPRE4ilu9LoeJbqAH4 x2JZMNzLmHA+NvivYUH9J2UT9Sy8j1Owu1WB3c8f/R52YJkEaLGlithXY1X1l3EsCkmw4jgw3HrK JGRV+rddbVBUvKVULOTFsbzWeSzGPQjArbeGSQQrys0ZWgPX3XftAIrTi2BvNVfnD8pNP6UzsoOt XvvHChwZIrdEmV+Iqa8P5SKKvwWZSFJ4CRX72WQyb392EdPUjTPdySIyVSJVPAKYdVItVVeGFziP /SsqB0eDZfLDskvKwp9rmmmO8+tZfp6f9LXaa7woqO76b7lp72ebd/t0wS4H5uNOT5povFfob35W NuvmlWvNrUh/WsT/AMYdnV7LHwHs13nhQi86wqdxfxadFb5usQDrsLfSUQJqSNfZ4D5a+GjRfEvA jzCjpzYxEk3dhlsiik9Bas4p7tWUe+O3Zl8kpvE8suqLe0713bZYSuo6Vj4bNi1Ozhjc17FbsOxJ 2m3nrtu8hm3NnXzLViVTvVoR4T7DTjbrsyHJR4ikKgK2gRlHROeqpxnV2jLnUeOSytpEidJg5LAk EBWFO7vr3q7cuVvNWx0BnpsvkIJbqKW0aILGyKQTJG/EeLcRRCKdNSNmFXvLxIk6SxHIEEuRKM6s QkReSqKo8KoSJ4c05/Dwu/YzlhvF5b1+K/2tn1/Njpk7jir6h7JIa+93h9kbVt98uyuPHXY13IYJ fZLdY3uJZFTX0PK7afd2VHeC1NehNxJ1pKmT2a4vw6SwUQnXG4zzSeSXluIIt/lXqK/iu7nQWahg iyNgnHG0KKiSR1UElUCqW7yMHoC6k8Q4lqau+Y/QmGusbYc6tI3d7c4LMzeDMl1K80kE4DlVV5Gd wn5OWMxFmWN1HhtwOAAd2fxUa3y2LLTTpzvcLn/Vg1MP7+XEhzgb/peV/Q2Xys7QnlbWnNnTZ/Ws t/xg2n+7Olmub4b5j5K+Z6jwa/BldEfep4uMT6qTPZZ/uOxYs6WAOGKKIdXtKnHl5QXcB0bjFDfA 9bibsEjTiVVJ6AWTeB19W0l5o8ZeDmrqGQoR4gxdyg62hSya3eRR0lUl7jEblPTTbF2tb72eweVT 5blYuRYTlkJqpzbF1NtFnw21dSNYQRkfdVsq8JLooDujT7Lptko9QmBJr7RcGs8dHGknq+XtnL28 2/utuqrU38LUBqN6soYVoQQHkpzZu+VGemnmg9d0vkIhFe2pI/KIK8MiBu54kYZhwv3ZEZkYioZX lOt7Pc0P8aoN6bfAWJmr7mMW8JwDrDcVVWMwNnXE6DTarogjIkgie6emnC4jyfNrEr6nfYeG/dNw mRvhgdZ4HoSe0oh7RXZ8z6d8sep5DlcNqq5wsMveNrMn5on7lfFj4gB1ASSgdTU24FgPa237Tnc4 nSnMtIkDVRTmqDpBLmqeHJfk43+k3Mw9Gmt/xn/G24+zzy9rvbX+74kX4h+wdgB3Zb04DkmF4Zsf tAc+fgWFzzurPJLBt1lzIr1GprLCxQksxpLrDRWUl95422hcedEWwQG9SIuXulM7a5i81lqsImbv ECLEtCIo6qTWhIBoiqqgsQoJY8R3A/PHmVo3I6WxfKnloZptIYuUzSXMgINzPRwCoZVYgGWSR3Ko GdgEUIlSL+1Cmltb3bHIrP1nqTOL1WtU85upkYxBrI891pF8xqNJmQ3AbMkQTUV6VXjTm9dQ/Q3J rxfC9UiHYZFuDIyg9ZCbyOkde3TyvY679q2nnCGkfzpcMOtYXslt0kYdIVpe4pO5j0E7Wqdy/aVG 3dtYOb4rY+nc6qw8tixbbBxuUxqWsWYySdEqMYuEKgWoqhkK6iRIVadIa5yukHkjtlSfGT08WCSv CxHQykEFHHUy9gqDRafQHmhye01zRit7i/eWz1BZ19Xu4eHxEVvhRurArLC2/ijftbhKhn4k0a7I d9IzhaO4I/7Sr5hYtjbZHquqkv5Sq6kvDP8AbpHSnzVL71/N6PavX8nE3EW+kdvvPXhbSvvnx+na djdn2+TGmsbBXPkosfb+ikXjmeeMZ/dcv7fN6Pbsvk9lX/0Vt/BbX0+3Yf7Rd8XU0SHgofLTUBfT Rpxgc8EH7rl/b5vR7ZPk+lP/AKK2/g1r6faDe7Kt85Jp7WCsar76Yzjrqh/Mn5QK8uN/bnHSnzVL +3zej25fyczcQP0jttx6sLaV94+Pu93ZxO2ztNY2ltp2b5XY+oM4s20benk2LbURj2fusNgU6Y0c UAEQB0FBARREERQVnq/XOV1e0UNyqQYyCvhwR14VJ6WYk1dzvqx7TQCrVsFyv5O6a5Xx3FzYPLea hvKCe7m4fEdQarHGqgLFCtBSNexeJiEQL//Z ------_=_NextPart_001_01CD3E39.E5E6A8C8 Content-Type: image/png; name="image005.png" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: Content-Description: image005.png Content-Location: image005.png iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAC4AAAAuCAIAAADY27xgAAAAAXNSR0IArs4c6QAAAAlwSFlzAAAO xAAADsQBlSsOGwAACgRJREFUWEelWL+LHdcVvhYq7hSCO4VhXhHYKQJ6ggWtwBC580IKqzOuEpeB NE7pMqX/ioBKy5UTSEBbGNadFAhIC4Z9C1vMgy1mYIu5sMXcTvm+79w789b7pGAy2h3dvXPvued8 5zs/Zj569+6du3WlbpteD2nsXUoTniRfeQw8Rhg7nxzGKTk/36MLTR3jOM/MK21vuTsfnQuuDW69 rtdNuH2u+2hXlWFIP7zuNhCtVZXzkzSQHna4q7ybUqq8n/I4ViGM0dWcj5UPZd4O2lU5y8EU5lfB f/W0bhqM8cNrUaUb0oufujFBa9+2NS2zVfjFLFS4JXf3jPeNd23IwoAr7HzbpT7CzPSXz1dNgSer ElN6ftL10a28X7d1N44YpwRAixtMMcPGxjG5UMacsDE8mBLHMgIS5vXaW8NFwa9WVddNfYx18F9/ vgqBbrhn4Gwu+s3g1q5u22rTjUAIJ4EYEhg8ZUs8xs7V5kCITBzXWOYxoB48XmvkHJzNNVDNwSgo ntzoHIRv+mndVjU8O7hXF6NtpSqw/rRL8Fq9Dn0/dVSC27PwPIZgEw9xFKxzPcRMYHNyYjg3AmA+ xjj42qcK7g6uPqhXjasb0c27cYjQ5qgFtfzbLkbtoINijN9+30Hupwf+1RZyeZ73ipUSNRY7+Z4V MSpIwRJZVBIBguPXNXwN/AGRuchs++710F2AesDZPzqou+3Yp/TtH1r46B5FJTwzIlQ0Sn6hOtKJ oFGK4aR7hss8guX0wXx/9rT+0xft8cOwPvBg5Ewb7MO4cpNBynPcBH9RpjmIcrDA4kUamfjFO5BQ dLJ5049jydNv4HxyXx6tjh82M2p3Bwh1ICcJ2RCBQJXuCWQuKBhC4MKVgha9Za7Ar3lKCsuLxci2 8U9/9yE9sBBGk1l2mQOQSWU/aWt5TNpAp3yqh6uMHzk+hRlNN6+ZKLEqy3XHR+0H8LBHk6VkgTmR 1pRQmYOkaQX+i9sVl2h1vtuBs65ynV38v4ypWnBHD5e/Z51wymaIL8/i6dnw8mwYhggoFaG+Mm8Y FlRFRlY3AktFx8WoDFY8Ii+YIaawYWL4GWvG5FfvAaTbxuf/6P5+snlx0r886ZBUZJdQyZKgk6nC ajJNHy/PxBQhzxX6Yx7P51EeIkvm4Iafkth2VcJO5virkqOJh2M8cpdcgNNvRnmDDqJfhv90/dWI Q6cbSeZVojdbbvbLybKG/2Lsrx1qYbwax2hg37oQYf0WT6bpOo03brwm9jkeMQM4L4FTZ/jfx7lQ qY/jBJjjqrs4jxHJidpUDypmIvJg5nJKsL6wdXUQjrgUKTaEZo+H8BC57ljSzL+bbQftaQPqbpzQ CyDXGufu5/jmfyFFWJjc0Ct2KuRsrpEYaINKNrpKd2if+mv/9RerVYPKQg7iflcXTD973KTHqkRa 8833yLbnFBCnKa1c6sQB0oZ5ZUKG8YFdAG7cwyHn4wifjbAARWI7nA9xGPrNZR8v6c1+YHPFvG7Z fR9X5GtiOq8JlMxTfKjhjQkncpFxhX1QzYqvnOsY65hX/qXxFr5MhxWYxB9iC/9DrX1A7HHTMkWm KdvKyYhhi2fEjaEiRwXGEd2OEqsJeAe+kHekoPNsGPVTA2nO16Uv+eDxuw9LrBEV5hX5AWfNqPBE cqfOVgoJVC2r+yAt2MscyFTLzAhs4PURyO9zyv/Uy7glVJC9oEltqNy3vAJU6Ax6siDBSCFa2EQk NU/vwqEatyF9d/L2UdPAX8GhL3F//Gz9Cz1w3ulZ6npyUyHku8sReCumeSJbq6Gvhcp9mEp8onJU ZkyuUtC9Vk9EDejXNAWOQXLMg2+n/xpfuK5xAd3Pk4fNXVWg5ct/vvnh3wOacLqZrZ+Iy/jnawRC GYLHNAbX3DN+oMizGWvElRCAINp9eIQYqobhT3AFnjLeWB4EEm3T4M5eGY3lnQve9B/XaN7CQdM2 AZGPjYoZRpxQoY8r7UUEkaN8Q4GOA8fsjbmAG4AEN7NeJFDJqgbGEII4xxreFQ+FaLfVUf6DSRUx sERNJtIfAwNEnZqbhtKvMK+EqnBlYsNpGmR+4G1IeCD32IywLt01TwP+jK+7lyJAIIgOHqTiuxWj lKgQm11UlFdQJvCYXME4c0V9DK0xrggP4/Vyt/oOPeoHezSxlaqaVvQNY62U5IxK6eK0nI4DTRU2 OlXGKIvMNomzkq5fRRJ6HSHkUO32XZSmA2phKWyEh93BYqKiQ3K/oswWREq+gYriUh75o1igGXuj 4f8jcg20EWqosftREfe1HPIp07AvnGNzDOrONQhns8Ap7SuLLVFDtRd+mHkyCccbQpkDJOdeVFgF aUt+atnL5DAq+U8NnVBhXkENyrCrz6MhdmDptbJ+VAZgmAd33xO4cr8qzNE0judmPJkkZ9Sp5Zhr EJcQPaRRI4jlklybDIQ8g3qBvxAu2R7jAWRVjKf9sDDyjHvcJQNz4hXhtGuuQVCErR0yj+35JR60 wBCSfeqbNM7vAxiBT8aJPVfea+83U4lKoiLP6fHcr6BSS71S84v/b+FB12irRYTUVn1WnVrYcEcZ rjE8cEq1xNGuBD5NiiBFcu4d5UXSofBXzGKGzLGQsZE68zizZw8oZr72krITz1IWYG0vriIqvvQr xhX2InMuKhWsWGxRoIjI0tnDWdqa4+KOMtmPmW3slcR99G/2zgH+sRjishrE72MGOr8BsUYs/DCW cLfuCza5n5UD+M68lyx4aBFb9lJtdLXukbWSacLXhlo4sbfFzKefoBq7Vz/HJ7/FhxAmL2X0In02 PpONXy4KNlrDo/IGEVotl4zIIoJMofasISuU9MNms41oj48Oc4Tq+0pK3dnmm791+Jb46LBGNX9z GeOAqqTqk+/MaRqzntkY6doSDrMt3jMO6d78PVKqQY/+il36LAezLdquw9AP8fRqbF36659XRwct ugX7Fpc6PPjp/PmPNAkSnxwEfnKxdCDnmHeUkVlw8OatzhS1Dv1N5QZ+7cMbAsfRNklt1nzUVwa7 ibAeZXMRzy/x5/jV7+svP+N3HuBVvlCm9Hbo3ryOL34cYVet7teiNmticUSB5n3DA/izQUgPan8z pQfO490b42u8RBf1uYsti8WRuU/fH93xJ9Ozp219AHdR4vKxFJ/B8GrTdf3pNm1+5ht5iXAZs1xU Tt9tkRXxlZbfbSe4gAgRJ/tuy5onVW2l8YYbMd24o9+kJ4/rozZUDZiJ1ZR56xMy9neuT9vUo5Ej za3wcmGUTTkPIgzjhEKJt0ngjzu6SX7ZYxgpSOlY9noqaERoycUe75fer9Cl4+MmGt3cQ9xRRZQH ixUADHgmACNMvmOavkcFRT1f7hF9/DJja8o9Z0vlWcu5iF8aqFwjLuq6jcqOG3IgLyvnZ6bUr764 7YNb36/Krz7r/93wX+CjS4UW/BJBAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC ------_=_NextPart_001_01CD3E39.E5E6A8C8 Content-Type: image/png; name="image006.png" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: Content-Description: image006.png Content-Location: image006.png iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAC4AAAAuCAIAAADY27xgAAAAAXNSR0IArs4c6QAAAAlwSFlzAAAO xAAADsQBlSsOGwAACpZJREFUWEe9WC1A5UgSrj3VcR2XOOJ4o/bhwC3uQN2MOyTy1i1yJedm3Y67 kSN3JJJ1cGoYRXDBJS7t0m7u+77qPH7m9D4g9OtUV1d99VV1JT98+/bNXn1yb/mz5VCm8b+Ms4Vg eb1atJQsRrPJcmMB185stID5KeNqKUAmc3XIZq4Py2NnzbHh1svPDy9MgQXTWc6bEFsLHZflxULF ZTkVXRYzLQiBSpv8OIVIY826PA2h8TFlAqzMCUKBa7kxvcB4mbMNuTqOP15YaHb2PDMl/dvSe4tn xXX3gx5Jh/7JFemFNTuEuB12nXTXZTBuisxuq6JNKNGuIeUU9z8JV352ptza45E151RFUfxzSBWR nR30i2pgR0YQgEGaLbb5ERj4gjWCggAXGIxJqih6qBo3zFrL98NYt4eXxO/JlOnUbLaAECLkQsI/ MmkX54JKuQ0hAAKjcL9GKLWfxyI982HVUMSfo2Q2XE+bD02zgZq/6Q6gurLwZgVjLgPH4AkbSmqP JPAwBk02ee8ixfO0dxFAL/pHmbzDj/5QGlfBratjhH3r1qarCR6ZyZR8E2KjPaEFn7pA+ISKmFHg IVs9RhaOpnh+92BXD/PN15wQ3/iOWrEdjCQrFGvh72EGZgG2KHiWIVQv88g0K6YAXvzu4lD88NCD DR4kz2HYmlc+dimeXH/t57yEGbMLxjlsQwDakKE8fRe7YZP44aqZSPINuUmABlt2qCyrmPPOjfKx 69IMsxf+UY3l0Zqj/mHCdzpfUwg37h4mzHOq+CPnPR7gkI+LZkjQAkYZDhZUKDKCQg6h9pXhiqcQ LtOeTcKXDqHmeGqW7UBdV0AMGAstdzucJb52xSYPebmvOE9tTluxhEX2BukeUDGxi+PBX4VSuvXL omUJpeXLAZK5FDjRMIYD0CgNkldcii0OmfILn2nIaQjzXV56CluujdmnupLvLB2ARL6RaIsxN+fY 9fJetRZfiMG+0fbPh+nNkELKYwxt11gXenv8uCLv8sw15TwUgVHcVfXQKQ0MjpbtZddEN0X1DQ65 GwlHByEXFviBRvlU8HP/Jts7Zx0Kh+nxOscOM8FuwnTF7Z20CqHGHkhWoBVfAOTplYd4Yu0v7X7n plwZS1yjQLkSLVFxkAUrHgVxgx2Tvb15DJtom73Kpt8t3RJ2jwjWIsJVDrwGXAmE5kV+pRHDzGwa 7dg277u9UuLWTHY7vDzJjLKSBHVyYhBs/32fzv/4M/f98Pluuv6KcNGTsMy0gGCI3lhRGa3ZGeLs 4d+a24pgRqG3Yor8KBAUC3anXUGFInPA+b7/+9109KkfuD5UIS+3w/3VQ5P2Ptjmwqo5IItgQUVj ylhZQz24elYrzSRRI3kCOZCVQbCcAV2N97F7kBxwuInEOUnNx+v/dn/c3qPCH/90BG57Mt/0/fWf SIl/2o8fWbeABPycsQgGFySgTQdGCDjVS4w8UuANvHJU8B1pKaN4QRAFIeMTVRCxX/OvIVxefbWr cTjevnn3U96iMgEnq2er2tj2ub/p0zXoT2sWrkXdQ/5x5JhAcyT1onz2KgBS8ZQgQ7yu1GKr27he MUNHnHJohA7uHqqbfni3PTrau4+PoO0UwExbUBXGPGLnIY19P9+h5CCO5JW8LTSlLqbNio0ynFLw lXKrKUuh84qHPGh3MMGbGObNfvPrP04O4+cwXaAeIt/gE8IMjW2osXMX6iGMHSPGICF3Yg0L8Y3Q FGwYaG5TCrIStI41QulcQTaK8kyuUgiQZYy08wYxfvh1k06bdGqPl3lCOUZfE5psY56jVWPCFU3i 3OV6ZFQiUQb0IMrM7sqrlIAoXCmlmHJxnmZY5lyZn7jCWDJUK1ccG3xAclT0L2CjQgs70hSWTayT UEnWtjgPYPYEbQcR8qgoFAQpClfQiuy4gmnuHBnGuuEuL7my5s6a27TSzyoVzl0y0McUlpjrPi1Q ORp7DnTPKKjjjGMFKbTgUrjCg1WHa0r+n5mcUdSJN7SPPImKKStX9kruOCrElJUAYm6NCkDAwwDn YQeUtbEabd6EdsSpRsYAHAFJivC5AHlktbjCfCQQhAkK0ELxyqm26b7jChjzxBVZD8SJh8onaid8 hfOY1IkfwZU0tgZscA0jQo6ZUZmx1hWKI+ULV+gOsCEDPIESnpua+XH4jise1MIVuLN7bkLYgYfX HYzFHkI8o6KIK0Bl7vZqPpBhXXhDGe8NCwjCw+sKWn1hQ/BiteSpbpD8r7hCTOQxsWEFZO4UoqzY eOuVcRBnxAi5IxfnOlRDmtuQ7+akFofn1cu6QjwINWIprkgPYz8Dm9dc8WNYYV0rDYCAsHNF2PCA oUyTUW3BFfBjjiwMxGbbbd526KrQ5HpBfV5XSp0lNtrFt+L1WV1BlRBFSxXR+OkM2nGFA4JL3jhX ZqFSo6KAJbPNx/vW2W/WX2bSVemCDvw5V4j05Lj6FWdEflZX1jOINqpf9LrygiuqhHRBhGF+MR1b PZHxylyBQJ+HTzyUCKJ+HWOuEVdYS3hxCrEyw6nm+RkEGzW74rH2DGL+2iCqF5Q1QgU/NUqNgkrj V6bJE1/k3UjBoHBF2USu8IZWsyo/ccV1KYieHWu/In/YxfGqTgTKuUMUPvjOdblCpWPr5vwothAr VIAnjB2bQhONC2Nq7OhnUPG98GO1g7sndxl4qKjIhcwCwxcKHm/on2zBqShZVSMKOvRZT2trXZGf sszVYh5qgNYCA/0M8jpYbq5PPa+44i9akOHSRuTQKPO5xyNEQEQN4sfSozTV3vTUkRII4ofbyjGe g4hwLnXF8fcPUrHkiNd+qfTHOGDjzyLlKSmib+LJQINqx6x4LLhWbGi99kYUlH00Qn2MvHWIysns LXmZhK+6Cd4U/HF3xxXxkEpimD4cH3Zd24JyWJJZG3zz4hZ7fXdK9hV1q8faBU7TTO3jXHFf+VWW urkU8JCqD3riiuTxdfq4yZen+3a6PcLtBQVE2b7Dg/1K+e7oQqn/JPfbk3aGxcLMTek4KSgkQwmR 242Rr0Cu4IF59n8sadOnJl0cNldnfz9G2VXuyHrHw8uQ8rHkrGeIM1eieDGHnsc7aDcFtHmrFxbl Q1wKNlhZOgQp5lPCeg6gGahQ4w0Nnv12tokn22APH3jciWAKu3blewZ3UbDTQQ8/ql2d6wMdJcUU iF8UzJSMvEP7faVyh27wqUfY+CbMpjzrdcLdh5h/7qafLd1o88AmwXlKBY6B4iXa45q4y9zzURdA 8Iajgq/bHP9DYacHnwFkD8esKMSGSnTVs4If9lZpjANn+IJeRRiwq+UM1K14OPPEFGzseOBsP7Hq rI6t2synN5QUTtNVY+/NbksoFaQ1rLIyYUl0z5Q3msKxOKZQRzScLMi4wg4SXWN/Y+hYlQzAsBvt nXVbdDYbNHII13NTHLwJjGGn+QUQMon9CRzU5VNGCQ/fPaVUxbjgjMU74DxVsVlgJesVLfMml/JO Dz2hqBryWShkvDnrwPHK8XAivTbF67a/SeRY1uCVCOKSlirUiyH16iXNFbsvtEvtOI1tgwYqtoBm GuumXrIki8yCxp8zyJG8LFZBWwg4yLmLPw+5Hf/HlN2Nv35QaPvXb/z9jv8DxgaoAfY3Si0AAAAA SUVORK5CYII= ------_=_NextPart_001_01CD3E39.E5E6A8C8 Content-Type: image/png; name="image007.png" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: Content-Description: image007.png Content-Location: image007.png iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAGUAAABlCAIAAADbHrqYAAAAAXNSR0IArs4c6QAAAAlwSFlzAAAO xAAADsQBlSsOGwAANyNJREFUeF7FnQ+MHNd939/Zc81svIfM1nfAruuzuYpP5TKg7LtCinmFFegK OTDT1BCJJFAE10hlBE2opmksBIJNFGogp0ErOQUqNbATJkBaKoADUkBSk43cUq0EkKpk8FRfwSVy gveQO3gHuW13Gi18I2Bo9fP9/Wbm9ihKsh0XHZ+Xs2/en9/v977v9++9Wc288cYb4Xu78hDit2+R h0EcWiEkVTWa9EPohNC2Er5mIQxD6HqdPKzH6pOvfPLI+8/zMIzLQr6uW7lX8zqDoFG4vFsaZHHs bW+iMLWB3oHs70YM7/puKh2s8+ZR4f/AFUs0N12Sy8FrvyQWM3Ti/Xi5vh7sx8tdQF7/gLAojeM3 j+JjItAfgLDo6PuQ18185yWfXu48gx3usrpqlu/fV+XMOQjyS0+zfDxVnx72vJ/q8vpeR9LMdF9K IQ96an+U7M8fiJvq4eZ5vZmT7+L7D0Beho76cgY087bEyiuJWUTOJ6XUj3N97lU1EpZeEjdqVhMt K0eQV3FBjCvE8XUvKfGlp9ZnLRqnhzr18nQyfgAQ+2vKa2omNcN+1SsLdGQ281xjVc3ROCVXec7T uiaFLbSeIYh7ygcG2xpx4IT6vgC5vK2jz5GFfnQ8liRlGquuU7Ur+9//Wt99lzd/TXntz1g1w05u 2yZTeKnQJ42WCzXOJHq5YxJx6YA+X1xl/VxtqdmrJqBGlvPlbZNqLB/U8ehXbghFgnWJV6jp8Wrf M+K+J3ndhKbya6W/HB37Ggd9ZOqGmaecyhDn98iIL5JUJpRxQ9tOLv0Fh7qsnPqU09JR4/dq6/1k uSOX8r1UYzma6N9RrJpGQE3ntDb0fnQd1L918a1vvid5TaNJWPAuKz3FTKKPwEV5VTpIrUCZNRa+ KsQl0kcqRUZ+7/pLf1P6izYsVUcTKOPTRT9OZA25V6skdhw5Qht52WfD3BqTCbpMVrtmgbblNa1n 30Fab7KP+wiqxVGNV3fldTRvlW7yR5rhKR0kLEBKpadUYwgmKtTY/LeGpc7SUhrkw2qFghPu65kX LmhbLa7ckIggnJJBFrKhidKa75n3xy31kY4kmOfC40F9p+4P0r/P+9sg7iZ87SPo4Np+c7lbQJ9h vzpWSSWOIGNgGDTz5SrrxGLJREarNiJuqSaI08y3hBcEQTnCoBXlundU2lMu47NEEyVIR8N21ANo 4hMx2RKWRfaBQK5q3sJfqxzdapSSk7dB3C3X41uhTKT4VflBrrPSavZi/CxbCypn2g1BICXLTPu4 cIel5eJpZ5yllWqP9zLasrhUcyzPDOZ17/2MzadHEAw9lp7inhL0nCxjrUO5GUr30Y9sK3rQHjmd U77blHWe9hOn7w+usJLxW8rrbVBmq6T0vKmmRWG1KeS+0Y5BhGv3PJHOAgloH5BSt8pb0lOQbpiS WtPMq6/EowIhFyTW9/RjpXqqBR5y7rlxdDc0isYyIng6pq0BxGib8uNMl0EGUqbNvi6zys6Xr5j6 mpbDreX1NsjyR24B/d5Z5dKc2+yVAw8zvCc3fPFYuoZyWTGr3BmXs83XeGxaz8TX4N54rlFAq1pL 0o/qu7c1BohiXv/YvS/DPUNWqfjRYkYD49Zsm/UskeW2klY1X5JjdU3LYar4Tfp+WqLT9/tSr2bJ e5HfVKlwr1+ixhYOJY2OefZVna4hDi2GSgYjDUMNhKqV6SAsrKOMpxDtUQGjgxovlxA7CX4ZN/wN O4n6tOU5aEmvgSjHjpDoyLV+3HCPwxRyTVd+t8hyht9Rf8FMeVVrW0gx/4iLey233Gbb0WcrBSJi m20Il4Ef56WeqtxasSqWpKcQh2rCnk2G6yy3gK536Bm2Ned4+VZH9dFrjGuojClH96HXGN0obpjl BXyObuqLZhuC5+U6wI+THS3rSLAHddktUPb2+ktsH5wBvmqezd/xRQG7soyuO9yyuJ1CT5nuF2oq 61ZbVWpZ21KPeD8IriovUSZQTEcIjh33qnwss6Si4eD9npVnlV9mHlzp39U49WgfP86XsK5p/XVL K4m8bD5ucXn59Jq3Dk2V5poZpsutnkgfZ14iT8fE3Is183SCyI6MLXJ278wWSIkj6INV0ylUds3o yBXuTNxCqC9Jd02tH6+vmJQHlHv8YMSp5yyk42ycBJaquhrk1wxZ9EZ1PqksamVdddWa17kB9Gml 15yS/WvmnfKF5fJ2Qqs/pACtMA9BXs7F6pCqti+us1QShxWnyep3jD0jSuzBv7d1stzVlK6pJAUW 3NpSr42yt8FkTytT4FimjlwKUwVa196Pd22Kn1u8s8Qh4+bbevA6mstqJTkxNVUVddW/9Xp0Kaqj aa/XSuHRfBkx7BbHhdTFk6p8KzVU4JLRvPShrC3M9H1wU/BZRZzrIy1he8gnaIIlhEuTBD+hUtvc IwWEJUryzBc4XbaYDUOT0ZZnSa3jyLKW5kL6Dh0HkGwsRuduHWQNM1odsSG6RgOdXYE7y2rU1zSy SvnchC8XfMXggZYM5kgWrT4bNnXMpCsUWJJjVYXTSFl6AYpNufB1unOXuYnRPH63cVbiQ9RP65Ip RnQr5qvmoLjWQSKg8r8EOsOdNIZ3bnkhSlAXNVUIC7vsI5a29abB6q/g6yYpwpi6rtawMwlxJQ+5 ZsCXveuLDh485syyBZWgy6yDPKZYM1mishrKESH75X6ZabryqvJf/tWFInLsnj9pQGkkGTXTrSUx TpJ78/yhYanADbNlQb1pvUy+m1aGIZ0KwloV87qwnBJ48X7cOu9fb6O/vIFfSUW6ssCugCvto3DH 3AhmzCeZWeXSoqh8BYcMT+t+qOCrwBkufShDqNyRSn/Jdai1z5T46I1WPpxPEpeP4uXcSF5W5EMj LJQFWVzo9Ll3N4j6otP0pvMr7qbwW/evZ8hLNqiq5HdSnDaTDVtNNKYLUnQOe80hHnwncZGx/pVW NsvIrFKbgdUEf8dMNf03gAMJQgfpIPS1bg1Z9NOIPdvQGqZK74CcTtLhvhXne0rxtMbZkLCJiBJH d5xlrcSCqZj7vEOn7ZXleNlFZStR7ktlf5OqBGGxBOgHgwNt8HXNxACO2kbzEbe0NvEuRHhx59nl RQdiyuV1QIRT06WFbaudCvDogtMcZpIOXaMyS+mYvBABs+clPoaJopwP/2cPeQ22Lvez/jjPEDpK HDYGW4O94bifDiQaKX7cS/kafMqplW0jmLd5z5UdAzmYjHHWeODYqdVDvXZYqUh198qXldtf6iLt AbKt+EfHYWpVh8dGsEPSCNy/nItb4KusarPhlZxb3VMICmAD8tx4WzmavjFkxuKu5fYod7vJ07YZ bz6pw2hOtFzwcUgB3enfPn1po893YnN3FjrtcOyn20d6R4DshYuXfDXkcd5utbO9dJiGDuvV4y71 WPkwEEhofb11+hceS5JOx6YT5gd5v6uuGQBBSCjo4liJADWwyVY2jUCtEpZ0n/SyOa5QbmTXbm0p BxfKtP5y0fLYharh7V7z47rG1OdyhTKXjogwAPbs3pt4W58GcWlxDBIdPPYHD115AWSF7qG4L3dK IIJLrEXnaDj2kfbJe04+9cxTvW7Sl3a2qDKJrw3zTqOcQCef6JvPLE+6+Sr4e/L+J3F32mHV9DeP XHUygHu8JcbzgOPqNIE1t+n05ypfdJqY+KPcKzr9+9e7H330UYkkZFGIbN3OZfluiGajsBvCbB52 o9CI7CnxYCOKhuHVRmhMQpOuo5BSPsoHRTEbRwshNPMwiTTARghRHm5ElRsB/osQvvTcl5/+42ez IkRaaPNFFOVFXOTxZBSKosi+Fba/Odn5i43Pf+qfXrj43NJSe5JOoG2SFY25MLEVlo/oOAQ+uedh FDeK6Nr6YPKeyV3vv3sY0oWQDPNRS8ToGmWp6dDXQEaK1Y6IMbNW4GkRhbkQtiF4Ox/ORnNRmMAR QrLymvdZkwn6dxRBbZi82T7SpIRVnRetxKtH8l/QJ/FylapnApki2jBjTKndluqjVPBpGCQhvpSe f+g3Tiv9cigGTXK6EtZQO99C8cXtdiPEe+n1FGE/8Kn22j0/9dUrX2WNrQ/SdiKcYFykv6Y/hXyU XdxCAebJE7/w1DjsdWVqhaZUSwEVV5JUOcb7aDGzrvSO6TWWiNekbY2sGlz1QgnvfuTRT4MgmzVn 1Ra17oZFKLbDZiPcKAxlVmGBIaJ4gei/EXJwpxK17RT5ZqQ+mHrmZ8bKmZnXbYGQP+8/8cdnXr60 Fc8ztc3JZELrgv9NbhTNFvKgpBhFi0kzyic7fz5pv681UxTRaAaCJlmAEk/HC19cW6FA5Y8iMFtM oplm2N7aGcxu3/3+1bnQ2g7pcy9e2t0ZdebbcQQxkLwdoojWUVhA7cKLxb/ZOBvMNVG1PHJkuWWk /gjsgzh4gXhbMeWqfFelwqt1XWHJVrjMvKdrPIiTbyn/BWC4Y8E6l3GXCpNC9fmhHffWWiaZhFP8 1WfOXf3T9fZh2bgsQxPH4bDAKrPFDB+ic+ShQXyY/teurt1zIrd8/9jSpLTAr3PXNm9zj4diYx+K B1kKZs/94YV+GFzOzz/9zNkzXz7T+8hyXCYepAUNdFLhNY6gr5OsQJurdpOHbIpIUIaWy/g6ePai XI8E9OaYyO/AIwXJng8wPR3jwbeUwxqStLOOsCBYUm5hsm0G3v0sedWVZRFCbWvr2uWs/9Avnx5k WafdFm/qYGrRu3Exq0cGnwEGw3Du4uPLSe+Ji4/1Mzn0St7DBwQaysplAAlJPk5DA5cvaQ/TPMni Rty69rXBA5968PH7HxdSSjolWHOMQZMcYOJNT53THbwbL8Z7vsfRBTPA2hKuvQX3HPis9Rc1/M9l rY6qezDh2QUvx2FENDh4/tWdQ27gxi/vh6eqkIarD37uM1e3JCiVtmMchX0VwfzWI0O1+ftP/v6p tfZqI+xdC+kTzzwODOWYGHeaIu8b7Nk92BxvqVUvaSPu/OW8114+/Sunj7Wxlc6DM1Jz564ZhbV3 pny6FTEbCIuOp92xWhrqD3lRlRrqzpSfR16KSQzPcjgrz94SI1gZQ5O5eVyA1rzhbCz9LZbTSuSU J09d/MLpf3tGFRO5W5ooeZs5Gjpnaut5sZCk1Q7dxXD8nu5wvJcDzXFYOdZ98o/WBWab4j2CGiXM TEEb1vZQbEnIN0NrEY82ybfz5aWVp/7Z78HSTUivQh93ocUjfhlMkpU19VJ7l6we5VpKZxtwV6vH 5fXGFC64hQq48CBJ97aGfYr8ch+TIgrdqYO26Us2FIm0487TW2dPfe4hkBUnCTHU/kk327hBfUl5 4Kx+LLQOxcvdEw3kJeKwmAlqSwFQSM9fvHQ1lakTyuwScSItxu53lkIfNyyJ8828t9juv5A+9cXf O9E+afIvoWhoooG3B6jMqFIXzo59Iiymvxyg8ow1RLVf4cslLvNf1tiFojiekSCP9pbh4o84PrX8 F6P6ZHvXqmMZi3KkQQqr6JkOwlpPL5/78vmMAhtWE0ZrR7dt07TbyerH4uOfSlY/0T1xz2rnUKdX HnsCiS2EhTB74USve5yGgw2Bay+1aN6WdtjNMXeoLaxfgynJ48EGSfBkub1i8DNeyl1u58tBsI50 Ujt7YWy6UkdYWujoNTCP9YdB26OgDCTK43fSb5n/4mkdhNOCjtzJSmjkmfJKuO5k1IJ2BQmehu3Q +cIfPIadGuOXWw5F9bq2Sz8OiQLfzvLHOj/1iW730F47tKyj5b0S0SwQ4kHUCiJj5yJ+6pUz575y QUS7H8ogmyG2e5xr6bWFuPFaMryePoimv+9JH82qTl+aqMo3pNyJ51KMzEKXXbFdqFrclSLb72pm 7w0i9dK6WYNS1dka9noGhhgrmbZsP5FtK5sZgM3wZQRfWSLHbTpIh6v3rKJ/iXcwqhyfUYWWRoCw 47+4duq+B7uHEvwgvIJh3m9JjwhTg5SzrHnc7q6GNeInXBZn8fS//EIW7413mX8M1dSKgafFZG9T s9oNnXO/f65XnoKakpTqV8AurZ5spblEXIzimQ8t4WphgjixX53FLbWe6/tyNRkVUt42lEPar6Re /1UeTnKp4jLv1zWaCdjWbJr1O92V0JZL3l7u8TC90k+WAxDoLXdXDx8z/QL7uL40ZFH39spkEcsf 14hlRayqeOJy3n/6D84N8sGYAIZrIY+JcOxWs5qzExUPr2en/8nnP3/f6Vsha0p2umVQLm2XmK5k +oGYrxsuiHHH1eUg9FV9tnw92uTrmeTtVhKfi2gFjJovpkyQ3bvguK99NPdZSpSl6aDdlt20lIBc hZM//8CFixcky0PtPE0f/+JjJ+473imTDOBLARA+GkLBjyWpZSQO17fSbjtpx6tpGJ977sqlVy4P tyHSEoBOuylRaSBpGjs/kIff++KZtfaJqZUxxWk1iyYg+V8cQqn8LLeM7nsqH2s5VXQf+TiJTLzn bLspA3iTfXTsa9pdZ1nGSUR617awKXHPZfpStbKwBP/+0y8888Tpf/Qwzx97+vOfve9hRrU58AVC QDnASgyyQfcQWYnO1XAeoWsgFkay+vDvnL66WVFAdZ8vLj6NM/kVaei1497R1TO/dLbaGTlIXfnN l5HE7lnMiguVe/pMdswXuyAiIv2z1tG1/+U9gTIo8k5Nxuamkplg85WdZPwUwG9K0T3m2gN25ish HhQZHV3eevr0r3327NNnezE7QDZ8WUe2tX/9Mim20D6ydugY+zSDcPVyOlASF+C0fcc8H2xp7sox shg05sO9JGlcfnHQOdTNt8KpX/jsWnutSoKXEu1n672E7CtJtGG3TcbJReazCwWMzgWy4FG21ZwY 1C2ODqvEF6nNTHmV/pdPGdc0arj3cifScWdJTm0Uu8hvQlnVzS3+TU/+2tpTX8RykRGG7vry2eZS +GWDDYfhAmfnSMAaBUO4YJ/L8q6wBAOJJSEENgMcWQzWERvGYS05YVkTyjMMzplnzmCgH/udx059 9FQ1Sk0zrCEvt/vc6MUIY8YruObyK6nkoKfkvz7Jv1m+FUcF1qoIk1G+EUUkqTbICkzK2IpOidQV wccRfWGgMstGyMpk+NRFZuVCqEXzJmbVkZIpQv781tnRt3dCo1ie/4ksm8RxsySGJBbZAeWb4Pm1 PIxeChdIrvd3oIfE6nYzzoajUd7MJ8VkLiq2X80Yi9zBbcpwzXXD3CSQ6xjubA2BXJwszIRw4cVn H/3ivzj92CP9b23OLTTD3wwry0deD9lunrZEJJi6QY4vjkhUkK1bIAuRhNsjyFT2gmwEjKWSSdiK VbhjfJHpI+AYsh7hmcutgCTteQWbdMSEdIUms3181mv+ZmRNOf0HHlE+CJfPXzwzzPq99uqpez5r mXe6nb4YiOHHg3Dh8tal1JwM0NQgnPY8vUWtyh5kitNWDvUIsXW2hzVpSFsJqxioy88NH/7lp1H9 LAKAmCQJPk+2lZ07f3YtYI4baT5ol+cOIdJxXV98Lfcrraje06zDG8F/On50AdGRxYO2qs1ikplw n0s6y5Ir0l9QfvXF9XQsxnq9Xn8wIDmQDoey0umgv5vhRCOC/tY6ZK9+rNs5lJy454EjyWpbLhVj u0K1Ps28XA7nB+mlfnpVZhlmbDUqJ2GhDbrMDBrZg1Y37qFrhmwGZOgwjsyRnW532mvDF9PP/NKZ ttGopXooTtMsbuPDdM588cmukhOuwtql1id+0eSKX9PROu2jCcrGONTosg41pctKfe3yquNHl/S0 1F251L4+93TnAYRWH8b+zMUnzv37c+tX0vYxtLEdT6KNWM11wI2rE5YPJ2v3dggp13onVgl6wgNW C3nVHna8Hs5evn5pPbvUbuMeEA+WtllIKSNrgV8aK05WD60hEyJvtjb2woBMEY5ukqyGrHv6c09R RXBFJjb7bfZCFrAGD59sH7fgxIVVcmqw4CufPFLvVVzsdeDEZqy60F+ftizodhRukM+mTRZ2ptbt yPQRIzdhw3L2KK5WmvfJjs6H4o6lu5o/ttD8sWjwjU0es/ooV/I+jsJsIYFMQveezijbbM5jBzdW jn7cMrDoFeXm+/nLk2h7K1ztZ89f2XiWSCArsmYURikZfdVAz2WWsy+ieK8oJtthrhUv6PUanNx8 qTk3iLZn8Bi3w87OON3Ksm/nW2kelMVV46SbjL6VhW/n4Tth5ehRsvumm9C50l+ICV5Q08YXmreN qo1sTDvzMoYH063U9I2DCfJ6BLotGz1BpIUE1ygC+h5lv11oywM7oKupjugFHTnXtDwvGxcwcmN+ sjna7v9lH8Ub5ouclogMdl2nx2Hxw/Ht7y9Ged6M8+3/Nb79/UegG8leyi4898L5Z1+90Fi8cXXn 5XG20+hEzXmWXhQ3o9cKNiGi3TxisNf41EwWXYQ1v3B3fBR4O2OtiMzQ7PHuxxeXWt2l2/MfDi9f lYZ2keU/kid/K4m+HcJ7mNruYoxcFgWiCEFw0SsbH3QGi/SGsGBWHCAHtnvMCEhM3FudCHlha2km 7BayVjRGonPDbJdcJeu5EWbH+e6szQYCYp1EcWsQvrEQWpuhPxPyC1vPP/Gvv5wXRR5FZNM1ACNK /jbJRbj9w+wCkSXPozwhS7+9M1jsag/mK6+c5dRFHO+yQ1Bg3kaj1lw83GGe8smwKOaKyYj7Is+L RXrGa50U72stfvz9y0yYAZeR2LWaW4zI2Q8WlMovdv9P+sKfjVhUBUJD3/1VFL5TtFrxhKg/79+x tDQXZhAQnheEsqQZi9i9CK9v55szUTEMW7Oh2M13ZiNQDmhmkEmhe9+X2EVe/8YkDQHslrVAIPPG GmQiYZH8Peu5FSkNDZWURxbBm39SzIbGdlg/98zT/W+OwjzitsnQQmBm7QaaD4fujxbsYzPsAt5B MWlEWTozXEhuC/Ppam9tNJPtjgbRfGOlt7STTdi6mhRFa06sLCQ2+xFbrMVco2AF3rG4uNS8bU7L 6kYjLDDMTAReRrNh9FrI5sLcKBs9+2esrICyiJGy7estfpC5mixgZjrhtmi5CTJsccRKd2hTA6zM aUttZlbKBwqXYm3ZwGUzjhLb61EdHA7Pf8lI1C6orT5q8K/OQ1TpZr+nXCGezLrU2XCwNbzwp33U s+nKSpMSJvC10qrkGAYZKsN2loO2aa8NBmevn23ESYqKTjrZuDFYH154Zn08yMZo3j1SFgqIMC5y cOxen6SolczmRAFb5WPC7wzUKB7ERrMO9hTzQorHoDaWUyXbSg8o3et9O6/v3IoXy0aABpxV9nGw nt0Et1fI5F7lZgdkZuwzd3nVvDIIXcgVMn41cn1vhgMPRaJMTMTYrsv9dcSGodY3GbCSFsUwDGrX Hs+TRNYSE0pxQpCQj4fDM390/torA8wXmx047ic/8cCR7vKRntwBdTa21AMZJrrGyHfDcE9PzMfg EJVFmJpAOTQylyrXEZUqvWJsiR5tY1FZHhzuDvNmp7ONNGku4wvGJRMLbAUUE6gzo8vv+Xz3I498 OoqwjBCApthBVaMLZsPMbjaYjYvdsGPreTQXzaACUf+Yq0jeDeqwsZ2tX/j6s9k3Ryg27RHSpfQX XiU0RLE2xdnADq0PspmIAmALm83LCfvVM3G0vTPqLi1tbQ5e3tlaKOb/wb2ri/HinfN3RfOtzmzY TifUlSffaqLDpGWyeFLkuymblKwR6eC+dqqLcRixJ4rIUL1F3mKr/E/+Q4p1QCNGqodWLeI3wlwS zWrnNJ7bWfjA4l1RNDKS0VxQ2SfqGoaXZggzw+UZzovk/ZloFyTOaLXi2XOhv5DS7ruqTTqTaAwI dWKBfJCda2/YPXtcOjNloOWlMOqAJ53YAixZNmAfQ3kCh5yhjK0MZWe0R6jJyrLxXsyeGxtfWsV5 G88sJ1mYjofWVl41oCXPx+JbCb21Q2snP3FSr5/pzaossewkmRVtUuX55Vfw9gbncdZeuXzu+lVL W/MekqEl7vYHffPq9l89ElXQx4FNIAJO7QitGNEny41/xaO9CcC2oTJfLdtLJTlqMNIytPXICmmh 739L5x7ySaSIjH1s4qm8GT4gjyd0zAO6zXZ6ia18B5hFipMhIG1Fm9+4vrnz5+wGS9G7HWbW4kmz 2Uw6c53WAhOdNd4Vojfwn3CfmHW5VaA43ZFFvTGS/f74PXcfjVd3wtZSuJ2d8IWwWODA3ZjZTvfG gCylXX4ji2abUbFTpHmRbu1sp0X/1WKS573e3EKY3c4nrahJhvbCf93e/AZjURUdL78tbhb4E3Pv lZdEPLvSXTk6vyKfR44FVciyMCEOiLvy0EwCeUpWxWIeZom6TA4tXC0CZFRTud9hu9OStNznMsWs OTPQIFd9GnxM2eeksInkMpL0lkcW3uTTmy+OMmLnYuXwyvGfPs5fT4eztNFmwaiiTNdHvWULWdox KCQQIaahKdsaPc05J206xw+vnbr/odXlNfIwPNL7enHSPQzoTMVqY0kazDCA+ovRkq3QHm9UOrSt lBFIZ+TGovSX108SIcj0kfQU//fQ2H/NoTrsJ2VveRQIp1w5dXNPuu7fYzsBHl4+XgmiZFXnnIeY ROTtN/GwhtnWjLjjjM0sBxk4P2GOXDzinMHru5f+ywZBQMSZBs46He3d8XdXuu/tLPzoYpEVzTze fn4jzXYW3ttZ+VAnylsf6C4udDrRQmuymc8148ErWauZFKOit3QX8G2EqKlACGWEAV/cDZOl+fnz //FZdMxCGnW6ixtf30KuzSxOR/goS4NXR0e7i+9rRnuW1du8PvvvntxM5pIiUQ4Lfw9MCyo/FIO2 8VbxGeYvXp6NPmArCU8DJ21imZjRdv7yTMSwZGhYJzCEgwoSSs+0ciGC+19MPY/3WEmslhwnLeyC aXki5vW24kV8kNj9r6hLHfOK8oVo8fVmtv0/vkHJJ39m7ciHu81mtNC5jbTJcGd46U+fnXvX7E/e d/dvPfLYmd/9UuuDi7h2BAiXr2ykW6O1O9daLVy80O0eaYa5D3SZah0JmQ14+LM3whx7RTOh/dz1 K3htUYzVmdxx55FWVHQ6XXzIhfd3OwsJDtbxO38ST/VGKBbDHZde3tz5izSPOLXSmsScQFLEglSK 9xR08tD9n97Nwl3zJ5Mwb4rF2JH+4FTLkDjBsMJXmQIaAUwLjxCZe95c8u8fkUEjVy1nFY+2OckL uCacNP11Y15r2Ne5hw7MjERp7SezcZJ95/XuR3v9VzeXugtbO9n6c5f/5MwLg2/2s91Jt7uU/NDc 3zu2tvtXu0vvf1+ajtvNVm9peTLJM852NeaKkWgcpRlSIEa5Ler28xcWos7VtH9bc2WdTFzeevmV jdZ8wlmw+UZ8+esbP3fv2mhULHWaGy+nP3vv3a9HGUHUIM0azYX1V8fhR+Y2/tvW5EbWjKUtk2ZY IEk2Dif//sezncnqh3qLESGRlqEJAnY4y8ZxNHQ03C2gZAj7dkPakFewNRcRA+MVIPgR+UFOWiCv x3TsTOGOZh8cMTnm5fPZaFZRu8VZ7rx7SIX6B8nczDUWGovzfLa+8BtP9/9cjsBij84VLGxc6d/9 43et3Xn3XcurX/pPZyZR+rWvrUc/HHd7XewA/SwtLr38teda7y0Go3SF6C/aXIq6u2FwpHn3Rn6V vOJzV54f7PQ5Fnf0aCcDKnlKb7s3tgfbo5c2Bqs/eddKzHTOzDVbZ1/86sP3fOHlUb//l8MmgUQ+ SQhFUebfCY/+5mfzyez2xujTy7+KjCxQ0UEl56Ry2GRWES9cW1RTcOjOAIh85+w04AwWHnn946nD X6xYdBnxI4DcAVZotEl4fZhtz8TKXkh/SXDgC6+EsIkVNLeZD9J0tHR4afXHFxdvX7zyUj97AcvF wsHs5s/92cudD0/u6nbnjrau/Ofnow9GozS9+87u+v8c4PuQWsjfGPWardlm3u21FkJnlG92ovmX AtwNv/K7FxeWFgevDlfvvP38V17o/Z3Obd3OJJ5sXFnH2cJ3/ok7u9s7O4tJ66XspU9+6Oegenah +ZVHXshZYayLO8OnP7N26pM/f/nixpd++ytfePRxnAaLbxHNrpIn+TbMFOFVGXZOSSrjip8lhyOE 200snP5mnbkxRDU1y/00MxZmK/zAWLmRaQ2l3fC2sCmynvanqbCLjvrsTLD1f+aPzmD+Vo+tdQ93 urIseNL48o00HV7busRuNickrl0frn6EdR2fe/E8OdJBxpadPDdtq2RXOGDTahOOdFpJ6+r18dmL F7qHyPQ1CHEur1/K0+z4/cur7Z4CGvnDmd6s1dmjxiC9Kqcq7nbDGuHR+nV3vjidMRywk8JewAv5 6seOP34fu0d+yWgaIzTj4Jxv67hnzwVosMiOO+d3/yrP3/tZLUsH6tSKoi1z3kj6cbbLwjCiVchk AMSH4LQfZQGTzqnT36nf+Ux/+9owTen/yFL3+LFj+V4jae2dvXi+c9jec9RWB4dLOWgmSthMlj+a hZXDymTijRKpdNnpwX6z8/bbFyzzmfSOrfSvXO5v5id+OlkRF/g12sih6XBLznG8p60dd1HHqRxn NnosJ0iMqY1E2uSbyaUvXpXfkze0bWI0V3t6AoedU9NekWVZ2SVSAtIyq74J4u8e8JmV8WO1ht3L ZzT2YMiRt8l2G6w0X+anCIOKKM3jtTOIsK2NtZP3n+D4Aj5O92j72D3Lg5C2ewkBdOejnP/L8OMh gMM2klVHtlbH6fFnDseodigcx3mPk4IcNwzjs89dotpwExrzfv9afzc/dm9Y+QTJ4QbHfIyGTDlV csVy2Hk1S47VtZTTKdpDStp7BOzkqbUdx9nXzfDwr7DpmbOrxBk5j0ygwrx29ebHIcAkvJDpRo4e 1WgXzw6hWB1FzTR896OPPKSsn/kaeXiNxmYN6QJF5ukOvPkdPIZtxVNc8o1khyVH7rWElRuJ57b/ 93DjG/3GB5ubr25Ei9HGYHNjZ32yxRm56HXOoCrmI3UWFa/FHGCeG3E+VY57dz4iosSz2I2KhYhk 2NzzX9/ZHoTJYhIGxegvs/lWuO3e9jxeTjEcZRi9MNqSdR8NWARxkSo5mU4KnWJVTjKkWF942MGV a042k060+ODJX0UEdgoXvhT5RpY7LfLtScRywedCSSnrZ5NBTbi6LdaJ6SRCqkpWui+Gfz/l2Vfx lEdjEoTirnDVVvheR7kOSv0AMsKiawr4JPJv9cKxh+4/hU5xNTgYDkiua3fwkOZHsZu5z4SOjZbi Sx+WeYReUKNFUm5+dEBfA82/G8eLcbIUdz8iqJOHUJZCTrvgIcVBgMfJCctlUCIFYYMrTaFNUgNR Fn7+H57qlOEONDMa/jqXryTogk1t7vAAZ8LQ5K/BcFGTkwvLJgrX3d2b8l8GPql86LnMkh5m63zn XR9bvTDN7rT6tNUOj1rzJBKsrwEnTk/8zPHByyS1OhnKZUu9wSUssRtNI/04BbkEyxXRSMd2OOpm xeybs+MEEzplxvNtHRzMN1FVedcSN2zZ6jNV5EUyAbkP2EHRuyd6XUbvNkB3atQxLg+gYnuvt3jk gcM4qJCKDvWtDWhGjHz6FiLCov+e/eIFvzBArgILcJl7JFgBgpGdx1J/OZpMDn7gRfMg4jtJG32P LmOuLK7U7PqBTVv8Fm+Wvzkhnfvwfac51Ju9Nkab+9whZOiS/jKlCE46Bt9EGFFOipGU47N76pOw 4NOsSd49mqz2eqvHmGGBRmk/Ask84UcHDEFSQByhVnrDcGc62t6i5f41hbgP/9JnjS8b0qmpYkbj kQvFD8q1R8ezjmUm3GJW+tpqlU5G8i5j2yXFHDlqmEQaMO6qIdMBLMSx88xphyk1SWUakrFU5oVU IkM+9uunx6m97E43WFWbc1iF3Ax9o2Qo20AkgrxThcxsrrd480AAivHUHSN8YTGwrDha0V/PMLwM ALKyvcaY9x90XspK+BT6jMYtR1YctukzX71z9VhCjgjhi04Mp/EpQJjFh2hOfkHfNeOOp3rjljA7 xlyLazgFw8JjJaJy/1GwcjFWO3EuUS9kuTAkjbVULd1hvOzX5yvgksNhANw7/czDF1443z4KrWx8 pjSGCp7xDocwid0xa6R7Q4Td8xpfwsR2OXnN+kp7Wm1KeF3otEk9c8KEe7IQSSafgB+wUrfSaK5l TRJQDK2k2pAXCv7xf86h9FXjgidMquvlmi/PIXt6GoqU0rE6mjbTdI6GmlOVo78MHbbE7A8m605R IcwAyXQ5ddTiPUFjU8RX+kvJZWvIJypICZ8T96Ey2o1MTaQGLIMuwesh+CJDyMlkSOT0vC00hfQc GFH2hb30Y/GJtUPHHzx8qtvuxuMEcElw0lk4rQywN+AUqzo1w2Jw1NFWRxkw0iZqOH7v8eVkZep3 xOQ0GM3rRie6zE9Jdu3YHKaWYfyMrqNHa7oyQqZuJaYyfvREIDzLTbBwR6q0CK/ZDgs5g1niqWZE pMbkKGOBe2FZCu4XLLYitNMbaERIpBuXwpHh35iMtgazyUwB7ALpAZEwv6Bm7P3QqTZsQQfSonye curoBRlyYWQaYh0AWVxsdrZvpEWxPeCICqEA2bw4oqbSNHkx19SGFK4DeRWDiOLgYkiyKSZH+dTD X+J7U3Exj8vomPtMw26b20RKRp8tZWIas+KdYEgbrBYsK4I2meBGcMCFG/5J3D4iBX33BWUWhNnk k6+oPZ6x4P0FBbSw/d6W/XJDpfu4B0s6XMyMkepjJk8eO85GxnBzrEMuaN6MQ1BJhkhxJcdK7/mP w8kUAJQtO+OvSY3HqQ4n2VhQ1Vk9dCLkR4TAYdLfYkTBmSMkDC3/ngFTHNOQ2fnVhsAa1l/kFOOT wNDWl1jDMtoCgk40LLx0OQENlPL8qp92MLXF3LEkbQ3u//6ErxunRyLyfHR5GbKQsTCFLC00lQW0 TxBEXmyP/XpAZzuSxNvCmjXWVkYSk+GdA+q4r53ofXOLcxv//cri3w6vF/hfJO6ihLxAIfsIPue1 yclGbMx+BCJTwluIa3aTo52wGoUjzBUOJ7kdMsPr12Fs0kiKzdHktUlxx4cS/Q4WbSccj2iS/Ire 05Q03h3yb+UP/MzPnrjzk52wZElNYc/2VW8I55Zkp7xlG/0wmYfXjUEAyCoBU7I/8G7JK98Ddx5t 02Pq93MEbf+VSWbLZWlxEx0hLOaeQ2vXWMB7MebH423gCtUcgZEGVNCMzTLcodxp32v3Ttx7nNgO 0GVb8nz9OAzHoamfDnO5ibxgYSiVLslwJgieNbr6Ul3NfTdeeeDYA0NwKrfXzgnxc4WbbEuD0s7g BR084Xi5euEtj7hz/J6fsm2L6TP0oorz3eaRsm5YdMIU8ZlMrv0yi6GPcRlUbhP/GC8QIx+zcj4O nL93kdWXk6vKBmYzV+XOo8BpX+nOD8smHt8zRlsv9kCQXCiw9vjFB8lD6MUBnUdVsCufHt+q05Ld 1BtovIelfU3/3a5GvNaLV5NwfIoSmBw/8coTZ/7wqeV72xwF1qNNhkwIIv1teHOiOit3Lrc7ndMf PS0xl+19QZVcuAIx9eLlMKXXr7TO7S3IKWvo0ijnzGeO/0+fv8fjqGtIolbXTqjbO0NmGeU00C/v rOssPm+4yAel3N/+ciqQl+xOlSShFs/03j09EDDZ9mqCBgEFfiaWN3j81RedtzLTXsUfxqj9GvWl 7NLDv/EwngY8f/YXHzx+6AThAO6r/URCi8ObuNbMClt/ll2QRKrzZcq7GGkQAuo466+Jqd5/Yprl KlXvHlDP/U1RYqPDL/fl5eflnNMaUPVTBtCevPSwynwZwj8TrndmknDMOpWpdlvhg7lHhUK1nIkG riyDROmDHbxKZuyp15meWKebN3QvnP5XDw23BpfOf9WOsCJWe1KuAGU9FDKVNqcexHvTdHr9GlOJ Dh97D+7MeU0XpQa16wCx2Efo46++aFZaRtqwcAwXXGWei3cu6B3xGLkpD3D6zUv2IEmfsXnGFpHR FH9H2sGcHQ5aStY2GJ/yWiqKqenCkh4xLPDVKKneAVptHz/+sROcOrG3muo5cJ50JMFPc+PcGf/u STkaFJNUv1lmmos6Wi/EiXQlu2md+Ilv1RfvJW0uGRffrd8fqh/X0nVm6ILh4UQ/FVUuPo3nP22B WGUZvLGx7vGmdgvt4l/IghP3s+vC6eG4T6oOpuuUfSC8U587+dCvP3AsQcFRsx5tGkGMq2VrbcqG 9nMJLpS2tWLaoA1iWG6Kjg/iyKUjrL0ZX/u0GyAhgkqJCdTvQY2wYBjR9r1tZCIvsq/yrtFE5YmT 0seW75bUS0CzLVMgznREUwGMvpa/4GvFJQocC5kN6vdOj9+IQx489ZtnkiwxB92fOI7MitnvRdk9 Pgv1+RNSxHp8hN9otUyn12cMtJhrK6pBmOs455evtbDocP/6nn7/S66dXUwU3bkicEXOIw3sALTf qHAuoQy7w+W483socMH55Ptk1ldid9ThOnBvqpcSjWsthV+rRueuW12NIgg6Vwhd7YUrDWXUIiyl mE3T+eglBVPHevbLDxKmbzf9/lfdvO7I6dZkGvNOFoS4z+JZbScdrJGDxztzNnglEe9GqLS2Qke9 mWIVJEGL17jx+32VbPelHG0OSgQR4pl+1KNKD5qfNWUBoc0hrOQP+Jdzg7srw6Vo0Sx+arkKp5Mq 5lFq9OlxqzmblsnN+uvNAqVH/+NywfMJ8yVBlTJSZsW0PlkkKmh6RWqpxfjX7axy5+5JVrlc7qVo vVvrP7FPl52bdroFj64NnQj+paScPF/ODhALq7R/UVlqhfZ4Ptap7KmpLToX0qfUVjk31ehvCbGb fu+xbkavTr0LyNezW0Av9xXhTzX/bPzo7LY4kW+NcfFfqzRmdBLJqjpSpIzdw6g0o69W2PAFJRkZ KV5HVrIqdzy6beWe+mprvyLMjWJG0Mc9h2KcOJ1TJAtrfdZ20H4h2Nrpcr6cRy9xGvzalwlf3vL3 o+03l+uqbg2ltquTdu7Tuwckg8CZKUO1EJEpxOVMljxmExkMCHGu7FkgCK563dQXguOIDhmmbbJg uApM1n912s/Lvb56tj0AsEc/puatRD1oPjUiDVtyqmmmIt8fYi/CSvhkdGnS+ixYTUklrwNYu8Xv iVa+ZUlQrRcrK2aWqBSfbI3lyNxHa9ss7Snf7x5uFcfxa5VGkPlNsoylqjafSHhUn2VWQJNU6Syf X+rQm+rYb6hmdo8X5mtc97YM+URzeT6+y3EVS+vylJwEM4Q1l320+gjX/UqNXvHl4KgnyajYv8qn t5CXqZjyOniG05msZyNxz54fNRPszcOwjU/CESwU3r/PoRDE/rb3KJYUjtCWrvw37F2sOtla41n7 Qfs0OKaknsgKValNBlMdmzkkUmo3SnxXFHRXZpQyPKy2fmhnn37XmKKqsox2e8B1d9r8cplUvw8w 9aC+3V+3le7wZtIXrhl8x8WExSLSZT8moJSDef8yoJYpczfC95Dr0Eq/kko6XjFgqX1cJ2bWk7BT IQ6kSLg2KvjlgbRMYmuW3yDzaAa20VNVpoEpdBPhOlHiTixzb35f2ZuV1xzt83uTzpoWztv89xVu iTIKEYQ/0ptXdoOwmHzQpOGl1PUOmHw0BGTBLZfjKzG2fW51b6dGpeNMZ7lH5qIXG9Vv8nirGmXM BjXp33oASRoX7Sk9VYlAS9JUp2s0+lTPoqR8P81XiZfXtNWS2ed9Wljcv+N/j6KWupRr3bieeROK k47u4Ef05JHZaLjgKVyRLTAESa+RgVImw7rxjQbz+GlOOe9fuG3iMVoqqwTkcRzsUUfBJD1jDd2S Wg7L/S9NiekjtkKkVU0K/L6+g8t1LpcMjt37KpH8KhH7130eb5KUf31Hee1L2pRO+bX6L0lBEzrL EaGZbGvmqSbNRX4KMVUIkltb6jV7Q8T0DllqagprZmGlofya+q8pqB9bnhra7nU+y1DjeooS/4lX t3HKfJeSwA5Kb9LQFTz3VHadVepTu6ewvt4SWd+lvLzaFLIq/6saoRzAfhDVa0JcZvd88uuX3Ejl 88h/+9Q1ET/2WG2q8U0W0H5pXO+w6umBUQws1X89xrx229Mxl9WOvpQWthKKHDHTub7S651tCecg mpzOm3mcKrz59h3jx7dq6xKsZ0OLyAQhtWXTyPKxHYxyJuVDGgO+UlhBHLJ2L5z66H6PQ/lKW/cD cMrZPXQb4r8HzSNlbq1bxwtP3ebwSPCs0pb0WSPIowI+qDNN8DtA6Zacv+N6nF7PN91XyCrzZXIO qxpXgIzlznw5lLGhC8sdcXuTwb3qksnqBVPTL1OZDIuZ3dJRU2+ZsilEW48ZjYiYV5jdHFfxLIWU eBRhJsgOwL8Fmqb5ehts6dH3ja/pfhkPUpg9RxxfQQfUlz8CayVacVNz7m4nnDhGHEF4SQ4KB2Mt bsVP1jVDCJvmWHlvfNIPQE6txOHp9LglaXuHFbmOsu//ekd8vbnrWyLOqawQpyoIS9gx0vmuIpeR yY6TAfKYyia695N8Lm6XQh3TqdyeuiJXgGgSrO2pHGYzGvu+YSUjH7emzXuur+8BWd7mB4KvW06X k+ISTN802xDt85+44vNIcCrh5bpPdtaC7fptfa/vknJbrAqVF+31ucoZMgLKWawkWH+9JdnvUPh9 4KsmqCYNcuvL711Y9SdI2a9T3XsJnyWaTB+Vl22Vlz1UGW3XX/v9T9X3MxxyGqpxae29vXncm+mf Wq1TfLzF7f87fNUD1lNNSVLx42zAFSU1XkrjMIUXL6HCdH0aOmB9OXsF/6O3Gj51k//P+Jpe8291 PzWrZR6t1jUVgqbQZKyWTmaFuGm8GE6m/uuj1VquPb5bommaNh/UBffm8neGVV3j/wKgZp0kDQKg fwAAAABJRU5ErkJggg== ------_=_NextPart_001_01CD3E39.E5E6A8C8-- From gregory.mirsky@ericsson.com Wed May 30 05:50:38 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 857E721F8687 for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 05:50:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.449 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.151, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AZIvDMbysaDa for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 05:50:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imr4.ericy.com (imr4.ericy.com [198.24.6.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EACCE21F8682 for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 05:50:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eusaamw0706.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.31]) by imr4.ericy.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id q4UCoanK028435 for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 07:50:37 -0500 Received: from EUSAACMS0715.eamcs.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.66]) by eusaamw0706.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.31]) with mapi; Wed, 30 May 2012 08:50:30 -0400 From: Gregory Mirsky To: "mpls@ietf.org" Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 08:50:30 -0400 Thread-Topic: [mpls] wg last call on gach-adv draft Thread-Index: Ac0+EEqii0CgIVpKTv6Ktzk5XMORwQAD8bkg Message-ID: References: <4FC58D13.6050803@pi.nu> In-Reply-To: <4FC58D13.6050803@pi.nu> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [mpls] wg last call on gach-adv draft X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 12:50:38 -0000 Dear Editors, Authors, et al. I've a comment regarding Timestamp format (Section 3). I'd propose to use T= LV for the Timestamp so that not only NTP but IEEE-1588v2 as well as any fu= ture formats can be used. The Timestamp might be of G-ACh Advertisement Pro= tocol TLV format, i.e. included in ADB Element with Application ID 0x0000 (= perhaps Lifetime of GAP's ADB can be set to all 1's and interpreted as Neve= r Expires). Regards, Greg -----Original Message----- From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Loa= Andersson Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 8:00 PM To: mpls@ietf.org; MPLS-TP ad hoc team Subject: [mpls] wg last call on gach-adv and ethernet-addressing drafts Working Group, This is to start a two week working group last call on two drafts: - draft-ietf-mpls-gach-adv-02; and - draft-ietf-mpls-tp-ethernet-addressing-01 Please send comments to the mpls working group list. The working group last call ends June 15, 2012. Thanks, Loa (as MPLS WG co-chair) --=20 Loa Andersson email: loa.andersson@ericsson.com Sr Strategy and Standards Manager loa@pi.nu Ericsson Inc phone: +46 10 717 52 13 +46 767 72 92 13 ____________= ___________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From wyaacov@gmail.com Wed May 30 08:26:04 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 179D111E808A for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 08:26:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.600, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id v9eR277lPdDU for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 08:26:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wi0-f172.google.com (mail-wi0-f172.google.com [209.85.212.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAC9011E8080 for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 08:26:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wibhj8 with SMTP id hj8so3174250wib.13 for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 08:26:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=/TJj/FHdxMnJNbuNDtc40V0xEF5QKMXx/vKJkdx+KoI=; b=cF6n5dILcTxzuD4roD5EZh96Rs461oZ6lVihU2h+AuuKU6+7hut+YKn+8+Ne9g7rj0 BsPqqjiiAXt1f2plHaVreD33Eh5fi4QNhs4VsjTodUoRQR/JOqcCX2EIt8sRKnvj6g3l sZCMpF+qc7oePaOu2A5l1uFukbbXc4+5osq6dmkIjRbY7JchlckEkXOiEMFBrnW9HJRg 6RVShSeljxnUdFVuxsTDchyTNC7xTIJ6BlG8ihkxe6hkqrjCLFPPCWYg9Z4D+LAcIPME OuBS4JB8l/ZVuf23pStUfTiyq0w0l5uZ9B4l/CAjj2MtGof30zYtIpK+acEjuNV0bz25 mVLA== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.208.151 with SMTP id q23mr10873203weo.20.1338391561962; Wed, 30 May 2012 08:26:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.180.82.170 with HTTP; Wed, 30 May 2012 08:26:01 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <4FC58D13.6050803@pi.nu> Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 18:26:01 +0300 Message-ID: From: Yaacov Weingarten To: Gregory Mirsky Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e6d975f79f07c304c1429135 Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] wg last call on gach-adv draft X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 15:26:04 -0000 --0016e6d975f79f07c304c1429135 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi Authors and List - Some comments concerning both documents 1. Regarding the local source address format - that you state that it SHALL follow the format in RFC6428. I would like to point out that those formats are all for IP based addresses, and assuming (as you do in the Ethernet Addressing document) that you may be running in an environment without IP addressing, I think some reference should be made to the global addresses not based on IP addresses. 2. The semantics of the Lifetime field should be specified beyond "the number of seconds" - is there a value (as Greg has suggested) for "never expires" (either 0 or all 1's??). This would be very relevant for the Ethernet Addressing application, on the assumption that the MAC address does not change that often! 3. You suggest in section 5.1 that messages will be repeated (3 times?) but in section 2 you state that the action taken for repeated information is undefined at the GAP level, but should be defined at the application level. This also raises the question of whether overiding the information is a reasonable action (since there is repetition to verify that it was properly received. I then looked in the Ethernet Addressing document to see if this application defines the usage, for redundant or change information, and couldn't find it. Thanx, yaacov weingarten On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Gregory Mirsky wrote: > Dear Editors, Authors, et al. > I've a comment regarding Timestamp format (Section 3). I'd propose to use > TLV for the Timestamp so that not only NTP but IEEE-1588v2 as well as any > future formats can be used. The Timestamp might be of G-ACh Advertisement > Protocol TLV format, i.e. included in ADB Element with Application ID > 0x0000 (perhaps Lifetime of GAP's ADB can be set to all 1's and interpreted > as Never Expires). > > Regards, > Greg > > > -----Original Message----- > From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of > Loa Andersson > Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 8:00 PM > To: mpls@ietf.org; MPLS-TP ad hoc team > Subject: [mpls] wg last call on gach-adv and ethernet-addressing drafts > > Working Group, > > > This is to start a two week working group last call on two drafts: > > - draft-ietf-mpls-gach-adv-02; and > - draft-ietf-mpls-tp-ethernet-addressing-01 > > Please send comments to the mpls working group list. > > The working group last call ends June 15, 2012. > > > Thanks, Loa > > (as MPLS WG co-chair) > > -- > > > Loa Andersson email: loa.andersson@ericsson.com > Sr Strategy and Standards Manager loa@pi.nu > Ericsson Inc phone: +46 10 717 52 13 > +46 767 72 92 13_______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > --0016e6d975f79f07c304c1429135 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Authors and List -

Some comments con= cerning both documents=A0
1. Regarding the local source address f= ormat - that you state that it SHALL follow the format in RFC6428. =A0I wou= ld like to point out that those formats are all for IP based addresses, and= assuming (as you do in the Ethernet Addressing document) that you may be r= unning in an environment without IP addressing, I think some reference shou= ld be made to the global addresses not based on IP addresses.

2. The semantics of the Lifetime field should be specif= ied beyond "the number of seconds" - is there a value (as Greg ha= s suggested) for "never expires" (either 0 or all 1's??). Thi= s would be very relevant for the Ethernet Addressing application, on the as= sumption that the MAC address does not change that often!

3. You suggest in section 5.1 that messages will be rep= eated (3 times?) but in section 2 you state that the action taken for repea= ted information is undefined at the GAP level, but should be defined at the= application level. =A0This also raises the question of whether overiding t= he information is a reasonable action (since there is repetition to verify = that it was properly received. =A0I then looked in the Ethernet Addressing = document to see if this application defines the usage, for redundant or cha= nge information, and couldn't find it.

Thanx,
yaacov weingarten

On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Gregory Mirsky <g= regory.mirsky@ericsson.com> wrote:
Dear Editors, Authors, et al.
I've a comment regarding Timestamp format (Section 3). I'd propose = to use TLV for the Timestamp so that not only NTP but IEEE-1588v2 as well a= s any future formats can be used. The Timestamp might be of G-ACh Advertise= ment Protocol TLV format, i.e. included in ADB Element with Application ID = 0x0000 (perhaps Lifetime of GAP's ADB can be set to all 1's and int= erpreted as Never Expires).

=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Regards,
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Greg


-----Original Message-----
From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [m= ailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] O= n Behalf Of Loa Andersson
Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 8:00 PM
To: mpls@ietf.org; MPLS-TP ad hoc team=
Subject: [mpls] wg last call on gach-adv and ethernet-addressing drafts

Working Group,


This is to start a two week working group last call on two drafts:

- draft-ietf-mpls-gach-adv-02; and
- draft-ietf-mpls-tp-ethernet-addressing-01

Please send comments to the mpls working group list.

The working group last call ends June 15, 2012.


Thanks, Loa

(as MPLS WG co-chair)

--


Loa Andersson =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 email: loa.andersson@ericsson.com
Sr Strategy and Standards Manager =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0loa@pi.nu
Ericsson Inc =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0phone: +46 10 717 52= 13
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0+46 767 72 92 13 ____________________________________________= ___
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
ht= tps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
ht= tps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

--0016e6d975f79f07c304c1429135-- From stbryant@cisco.com Wed May 30 09:03:25 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3658211E80CF for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 09:03:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -110.407 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.407 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.192, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id E8OA35+xSB7C for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 09:03:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ams-iport-2.cisco.com (ams-iport-2.cisco.com [144.254.224.141]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1597D11E8083 for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 09:03:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=stbryant@cisco.com; l=614; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1338393804; x=1339603404; h=message-id:date:from:reply-to:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=9mC7vRDZeCRJx4gE9cx2PTKvynVdHSqv3elYrJms960=; b=fUyMbb9MZZFk3kJhiPALYMjEESdRKs2zSmKyPhKERApB/mxH3lkA36b8 nSfGfaNp1W+XzHk6L3l4LRvKkBkTfg/au4DECMoXh3WT+oZdxvjkw160p CdYOFp8maXhEItPmj8WEhfxLd/VJA8e3VFJD5PGJjIatsTZ9dHCNu8qLt g=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EAO9Dxk+Q/khR/2dsb2JhbABEtA2BB4IXAQEBAwESAQIjQAEFCwsOExYPCQMCAQIBRQYNAQcBAR6HZAWZGINHEJwukEcDlRiODYEEYoJh X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,685,1330905600"; d="scan'208";a="73821850" Received: from ams-core-1.cisco.com ([144.254.72.81]) by ams-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 30 May 2012 16:03:23 +0000 Received: from cisco.com (mrwint.cisco.com [64.103.70.36]) by ams-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q4UG3MI7026030 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 30 May 2012 16:03:23 GMT Received: from stbryant-mac2.local (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cisco.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id q4UG3LhL020101; Wed, 30 May 2012 17:03:21 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <4FC644C9.6050303@cisco.com> Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 17:03:21 +0100 From: Stewart Bryant User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Yaacov Weingarten References: <4FC58D13.6050803@pi.nu> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] wg last call on gach-adv draft X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: stbryant@cisco.com List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 16:03:25 -0000 > 2. The semantics of the Lifetime field should be specified beyond "the > number of seconds" - is there a value (as Greg has suggested) for > "never expires" (either 0 or all 1's??). This would be very relevant > for the Ethernet Addressing application, on the assumption that the > MAC address does not change that often! I think that for NTP at least 0 and Max are both actual times so we would need a new bit. As to Ethernet Addresses, they do change when you change a line card, and there is history (ARP) of IETF protocols asking for confirmation that the value is unchanged. Stewart From danfrost@cisco.com Wed May 30 10:10:20 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5112121F8636 for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 10:10:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oOYRGdEo+kAh for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 10:10:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8851721F8633 for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 10:10:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=697; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1338397819; x=1339607419; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=t2/JwS8ai/TkdTQc7HETZ5YXVOw/hOcPdk1cWvXPxXY=; b=Cgl41c1d/7dhfrjxLhnk5+rtxBLPjHShgudUdzUVOEOLQljTUhWzup88 BuliuNaKt9RDyYf5+maisIuxgDueWxEfM4CNW8iSjLZJCYSqO9pJi/l19 NHTSWiU5gHkH6YNjd3+NFbiJkYxa2g4MFZ+1C8H3DBS0kq1p3NfVwzKcy w=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av0EABlUxk+tJV2Y/2dsb2JhbABEtBGBB4IXAQEBAwESASc/BQsLDgouFEk1h2QFmSmgBIsFhGJgA5UXAY4NgWaCYQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,685,1330905600"; d="scan'208";a="84999974" Received: from rcdn-core-1.cisco.com ([173.37.93.152]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP; 30 May 2012 17:10:19 +0000 Received: from isolaria.cisco.com (isolaria.cisco.com [10.83.106.70]) by rcdn-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q4UHAIb5022499 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 30 May 2012 17:10:19 GMT Received: from isolaria.cisco.com (isolaria [127.0.0.1]) by isolaria.cisco.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id q4UHAILE014387; Wed, 30 May 2012 13:10:18 -0400 Received: (from danfrost@localhost) by isolaria.cisco.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) id q4UHAIlf014386; Wed, 30 May 2012 18:10:18 +0100 Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 18:10:18 +0100 From: Dan Frost To: Lingaraj Mishra Message-ID: <20120530171018.GD7233@cisco.com> References: <4FC58D13.6050803@pi.nu> <1338363812.34656.YahooMailNeo@web121501.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1338363812.34656.YahooMailNeo@web121501.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] wg last call on gach-adv and ethernet-addressing drafts X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 17:10:20 -0000 On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 12:43:32AM -0700, Lingaraj Mishra wrote: > 1 - The introduction section talks about GACH being used as 'Auxillary > Data Channel' which is never being defined in RFC5586. It says GACH > will be predominantly used for OAMP. The description of the G-ACh in this draft matches the one in RFC 5960, for instance. > 2 - Here we are specifying that multiple protocols will use GAP for > their necessary purpose. So, instead of defining "Application ID", we > should use "Protocol ID" which will define specific protocol > identifiers. It began as "Protocol ID" originally. It was changed because GAP applications are not necessarily protocols. Thanks, -d From danfrost@cisco.com Wed May 30 10:22:30 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EBF721F8657 for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 10:22:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DDqIhehj6PIf for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 10:22:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.86.75]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11DF921F8659 for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 10:22:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=danfrost@cisco.com; l=1924; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1338398548; x=1339608148; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=tKDr5f1no7Jh6V5AWA9uxlguHOM+5R/pX/oa76Gwl0w=; b=Ycj6DLaEKl9M7oca8oO8kObKEbOluKWCF7IqsNxH+oWRsRm5ZsMa7Wvu rjRuCz0Qh58cgc31bFD39FnWQ45vDzwygHC8k+A/GbbLlv/D0NsOqqAZN taCXwV02TACbg4ASi4mq9kGASoVTeiwyINneMflIBcpwLj4bsxhkK9idD U=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av0EABFXxk+tJV2b/2dsb2JhbAA6CrQRgQeCFwEBAQMBEgEnPwULCw4KLhRJNYdkBZkmoAKLBRCEUmADlRcBjg2BZoJh X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,685,1330905600"; d="scan'208";a="88029506" Received: from rcdn-core-4.cisco.com ([173.37.93.155]) by rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 30 May 2012 17:22:24 +0000 Received: from isolaria.cisco.com (isolaria.cisco.com [10.83.106.70]) by rcdn-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q4UHMNIk024007 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 30 May 2012 17:22:23 GMT Received: from isolaria.cisco.com (isolaria [127.0.0.1]) by isolaria.cisco.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id q4UHMNvO014531; Wed, 30 May 2012 13:22:23 -0400 Received: (from danfrost@localhost) by isolaria.cisco.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) id q4UHMNdF014530; Wed, 30 May 2012 18:22:23 +0100 Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 18:22:23 +0100 From: Dan Frost To: Yaacov Weingarten Message-ID: <20120530172223.GE7233@cisco.com> References: <4FC58D13.6050803@pi.nu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] wg last call on gach-adv draft X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 17:22:30 -0000 Hi Yaacov, On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 06:26:01PM +0300, Yaacov Weingarten wrote: > 1. Regarding the local source address format - that you state that it > SHALL follow the format in RFC6428. I would like to point out that > those formats are all for IP based addresses, and assuming (as you do > in the Ethernet Addressing document) that you may be running in an > environment without IP addressing, I think some reference should be > made to the global addresses not based on IP addresses. Thanks, we'll revisit this. > 2. The semantics of the Lifetime field should be specified beyond "the > number of seconds" - is there a value (as Greg has suggested) for > "never expires" (either 0 or all 1's??). This would be very relevant > for the Ethernet Addressing application, on the assumption that the > MAC address does not change that often! Describing the lifetime of a piece of data as infinite is a bad idea, I think. Better to refresh it periodically. > 3. You suggest in section 5.1 that messages will be repeated (3 > times?) but in section 2 you state that the action taken for repeated > information is undefined at the GAP level, but should be defined at > the application level. This also raises the question of whether > overiding the information is a reasonable action (since there is > repetition to verify that it was properly received. I then looked in > the Ethernet Addressing document to see if this application defines > the usage, for redundant or change information, and couldn't find it. The idea of the repeat transmission in Section 5.1 is that the messages are sent with the same Message Identifier, so the receiver can identify them as duplicates. We'll clarify this in the text. How the receiver handles receiving a TLV of a Type it already has is another matter; this is specified in Section 5.2 (which is consistent with Section 2). Cheers, -d From internet-drafts@ietf.org Wed May 30 15:35:30 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DB8A11E80D5; Wed, 30 May 2012 15:35:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.151 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.151 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.448, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qUJ5zdORGvte; Wed, 30 May 2012 15:35:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DEA711E8073; Wed, 30 May 2012 15:35:30 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.02 Message-ID: <20120530223530.10784.48348.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 15:35:30 -0700 Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-04.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 22:35:30 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working= Group of the IETF. Title : Inter-Area P2MP Segmented LSPs Author(s) : Yakov Rekhter Rahul Aggarwal Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-04.txt Pages : 37 Date : 2012-05-30 This document describes procedures for building inter-area point-to- multipoint (P2MP) segmented service LSPs by partitioning such LSPs into intra-area segments and using BGP as the inter-area routing and label distribution protocol. Within each IGP area the intra-area segments are either carried over intra-area P2MP LSPs, using P2MP LSP hierarchy, or instantiated using ingress replication. The intra-area P2MP LSPs may be signaled using P2MP RSVP-TE or P2MP mLDP. If ingress replication is used within an IGP area, then MP2P LDP LSPs or P2P RSVP-TE LSPs may be used in the IGP area. The applications/services that use such inter-area service LSPs may be BGP MVPN, VPLS multicast or IP multicast over MPLS. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-04.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-04.txt The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast/