From nobody Thu Jun 2 00:31:03 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9597B12D678; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 00:31:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.921 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.921 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RHRhN6yJ1WuH; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 00:30:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp-us.alcatel-lucent.com (us-hpswa-esg-02.alcatel-lucent.com [135.245.18.30]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B80412D661; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 00:30:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from us70uumx4.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (unknown [135.245.18.16]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id 40B6493053509; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 07:30:57 +0000 (GMT) Received: from us70uusmtp4.zam.alcatel-lucent.com (us70uusmtp4.zam.alcatel-lucent.com [135.5.2.66]) by us70uumx4.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id u527UweJ007420 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 2 Jun 2016 07:30:58 GMT Received: from US70UWXCHHUB01.zam.alcatel-lucent.com (us70uwxchhub01.zam.alcatel-lucent.com [135.5.2.48]) by us70uusmtp4.zam.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id u527UwPK006350 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 2 Jun 2016 07:30:58 GMT Received: from US70UWXCHMBA03.zam.alcatel-lucent.com ([169.254.9.191]) by US70UWXCHHUB01.zam.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.5.2.48]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 03:30:58 -0400 From: "Dolganow, Andrew (Nokia - SG)" To: "ospf@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [OSPF] Working Group Last Call for OSPF Extensions for Segment Routing - draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions (Correct Draft Authors E-mail) Thread-Index: AQHRuwpTyqvMDWVwE0CmWLaNJSIquJ/SUiyAgAO1cwA= Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 07:30:58 +0000 Message-ID: <80D1E632-5789-427C-A241-CCA361B43C51@alcatel-lucent.com> References: <574D36D2.2060409@cisco.com> <21AF52BF-667E-4B0E-AAA5-AFE3530144E5@alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: <21AF52BF-667E-4B0E-AAA5-AFE3530144E5@alcatel-lucent.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-CA X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <0D7B5F8431EA54428F9F7B16CC30CB13@exchange.lucent.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [OSPF] Working Group Last Call for OSPF Extensions for Segment Routing - draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions (Correct Draft Authors E-mail) X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2016 07:31:01 -0000 Support Andrew Sent from my iPhone >> -------- Original Message -------- >> Subject: Working Group Last Call for OSPF Extensions for Segment=20 >> Routing - draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions (Correct Draft=20 >> Authors E-mail) >> Date: Wed, 4 May 2016 15:41:26 +0000 >> From: Acee Lindem (acee) >> To: OSPF WG List >> CC: draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org=20 >> >>=20 >> The subject draft is very stable, has multiple interoperable >> implementations, and many (including myself) have done thorough reviews.= I >> believe we are ready for WG last call for this very important draft. >>=20 >> With great pleasure, this begins the WG last call for the subject draft. >> Please send your comments to this list prior to 12:00 AM GMT, May 19th, >> 2016. >>=20 >> Here is a URL for your convenance: >>=20 >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensi= ons >> / >>=20 >> Thanks, >> Acee > _______________________________________________ > OSPF mailing list > OSPF@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf From nobody Thu Jun 2 07:04:15 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D18D12D701; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 07:04:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -15.947 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.947 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id n2ol1fF9zlk1; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 07:04:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.86.79]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2857112D6FA; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 07:04:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1236; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1464876249; x=1466085849; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:content-id: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=KGnr8AVeDYmUcrAqdfhktgr4QfN7foklcOQ4/12GpDY=; b=FmLU3XYOLQe6rgXTRQwXbHGZrDdOUcdevKhozM+Jg+8MmzKX0n98q/Ra kj14asKxKHVi9DxFBkbBGEdX8IbgKyrmTeF/ziLTh77ddImbj6DidRnle 7Z3UdO1jeFtCswaWcjfrgZ4LpxP9UgHYyoO6d6RizDJ4XZUIBG3RvTlDe 0=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0ABAgDrO1BX/5tdJa1dgzpWbw4GuimBe?= =?us-ascii?q?RcNhW4egR04FAEBAQEBAQFlJ4RGAQEEAQEBGgYROgsSAQgaAh8HAgQlCxUSBAE?= =?us-ascii?q?NBYgvDrBXkSkBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARgFgQGJc4RAgwGCWQWYNwGFf?= =?us-ascii?q?4gggWmET4hkj0sBHjaCOYE1bol9fwEBAQ?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.26,406,1459814400"; d="scan'208";a="109050758" Received: from rcdn-core-4.cisco.com ([173.37.93.155]) by rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 02 Jun 2016 14:04:08 +0000 Received: from XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com (xch-rtp-013.cisco.com [64.101.220.153]) by rcdn-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u52E47Ie016735 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 2 Jun 2016 14:04:08 GMT Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) by XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com (64.101.220.153) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 10:04:07 -0400 Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 10:04:07 -0400 From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" , OSPF WG List Thread-Topic: [OSPF] Working Group Last Call for OSPF Extensions for Segment Routing - draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions (Correct Draft Authors E-mail) Thread-Index: AQHRvNegieQTrbGfhUKI6yZAyuKmpg== Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 14:04:07 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.116.152.196] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [OSPF] Working Group Last Call for OSPF Extensions for Segment Routing - draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions (Correct Draft Authors E-mail) X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2016 14:04:13 -0000 VGhlIFdHIGxhc3QgY2FsbCBlbmRlZCBhIGNvdXBsZSB3ZWVrcyBhZ28gYW5kIEkgd2lsbCBhY3Qg YXMgZG9jdW1lbnQNCnNoZXBoZXJkIGFuZCByZXF1ZXN0IHB1YmxpY2F0aW9uLg0KVGhhbmtzLA0K QWNlZSANCg0KT24gNS80LzE2LCAxMTo0MSBBTSwgIk9TUEYgb24gYmVoYWxmIG9mIEFjZWUgTGlu ZGVtIChhY2VlKSINCjxvc3BmLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmcgb24gYmVoYWxmIG9mIGFjZWVAY2lz Y28uY29tPiB3cm90ZToNCg0KPlRoZSBzdWJqZWN0IGRyYWZ0IGlzIHZlcnkgc3RhYmxlLCBoYXMg bXVsdGlwbGUgaW50ZXJvcGVyYWJsZQ0KPmltcGxlbWVudGF0aW9ucywgYW5kIG1hbnkgKGluY2x1 ZGluZyBteXNlbGYpIGhhdmUgZG9uZSB0aG9yb3VnaCByZXZpZXdzLiBJDQo+YmVsaWV2ZSB3ZSBh cmUgcmVhZHkgZm9yIFdHIGxhc3QgY2FsbCBmb3IgdGhpcyB2ZXJ5IGltcG9ydGFudCBkcmFmdC4N Cj4NCj5XaXRoIGdyZWF0IHBsZWFzdXJlLCB0aGlzIGJlZ2lucyB0aGUgV0cgbGFzdCBjYWxsIGZv ciB0aGUgc3ViamVjdCBkcmFmdC4NCj5QbGVhc2Ugc2VuZCB5b3VyIGNvbW1lbnRzIHRvIHRoaXMg bGlzdCBwcmlvciB0byAxMjowMCBBTSBHTVQsIE1heSAxOXRoLA0KPjIwMTYuDQo+DQo+SGVyZSBp cyBhIFVSTCBmb3IgeW91ciBjb252ZW5hbmNlOg0KPg0KPmh0dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0 Zi5vcmcvZG9jL2RyYWZ0LWlldGYtb3NwZi1zZWdtZW50LXJvdXRpbmctZXh0ZW5zaW9uDQo+cw0K Pi8NCj4NCj5UaGFua3MsDQo+QWNlZQ0KPg0KPl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQo+T1NQRiBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QNCj5PU1BGQGlldGYub3JnDQo+ aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9vc3BmDQoNCg== From nobody Fri Jun 3 14:45:08 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CF3E12D602; Fri, 3 Jun 2016 14:45:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -15.947 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.947 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id z8OPl20Fr_Tk; Fri, 3 Jun 2016 14:45:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alln-iport-1.cisco.com (alln-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.142.88]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CDAD212D0D1; Fri, 3 Jun 2016 14:45:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1734; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1464990304; x=1466199904; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=oY90xYvMJ1jUpvStZRH/KnB7nJezgQTgCf0KlDp+lpc=; b=EzcjMwWP+5WQ+GCRsefAYb98ZDJl0G9keGHQpt03aSNU88L1ZpvV4Ml7 ZgkvZbAJ6v973tdtsJ4sKiRWjTP8Ztb4NbJ0v44MHqpfpYlvdnJNycvDa QHXPvNsGRjFapEs5XJrct9/l3jF8pWEpZzBNygpoVgrD8x7UJxMjqH7fM I=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0AaAgC6+VFX/4ENJK1egzpWbw4Gul+Be?= =?us-ascii?q?hcNhW4CHIEbOBQBAQEBAQEBZSeERgEBBAEBARoGEToLEAIBCBgCAh8HAgICJQs?= =?us-ascii?q?VEAIEAQ0FiC8OsUqRJwEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARcFgQGJc4RAgwGCW?= =?us-ascii?q?QWYRQGGAoghgWmET4hkj1EBHjaCOYE1bokTfwEBAQ?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.26,414,1459814400"; d="scan'208";a="281557805" Received: from alln-core-9.cisco.com ([173.36.13.129]) by alln-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 03 Jun 2016 21:45:03 +0000 Received: from XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com (xch-rtp-013.cisco.com [64.101.220.153]) by alln-core-9.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u53Lj2YX016756 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 3 Jun 2016 21:45:02 GMT Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) by XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com (64.101.220.153) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Fri, 3 Jun 2016 17:45:01 -0400 Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Fri, 3 Jun 2016 17:45:01 -0400 From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" , OSPF WG List Thread-Topic: [OSPF] Working Group Last Call for OSPF Extensions for Segment Routing - draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions (Correct Draft Authors E-mail) Thread-Index: AQHRvNegieQTrbGfhUKI6yZAyuKmpp/YSKkA Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2016 21:45:01 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.116.152.196] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <79A0BFC463F6C744945F15578302623D@emea.cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [OSPF] Working Group Last Call for OSPF Extensions for Segment Routing - draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions (Correct Draft Authors E-mail) X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2016 21:45:06 -0000 QXV0aG9ycywgDQoNCkZvciB0aGUgZmluYWwgdGltZSwgY2FuIHlvdSBjb25maXJtIHdoZXRoZXIg b3Igbm90IHlvdSBhcmUgYXdhcmUgb2YgYW55DQpJUFIgb3RoZXIgdGhhbj8gDQoNCmh0dHBzOi8v ZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0Zi5vcmcvaXByLzI0MDEvDQpodHRwczovL2RhdGF0cmFja2VyLmlldGYu b3JnL2lwci8yMjMzLyAodGhlIElQUiBzdGF0ZW1lbnQgb24gdGhlIG5vbi1XRw0KZHJhZnQgdmVy c2lvbikgDQoNClRoYW5rcywNCkFjZWUgDQoNCk9uIDYvMi8xNiwgMTA6MDQgQU0sICJBY2VlIExp bmRlbSAoYWNlZSkiIDxhY2VlQGNpc2NvLmNvbT4gd3JvdGU6DQoNCj5UaGUgV0cgbGFzdCBjYWxs IGVuZGVkIGEgY291cGxlIHdlZWtzIGFnbyBhbmQgSSB3aWxsIGFjdCBhcyBkb2N1bWVudA0KPnNo ZXBoZXJkIGFuZCByZXF1ZXN0IHB1YmxpY2F0aW9uLg0KPlRoYW5rcywNCj5BY2VlIA0KPg0KPk9u IDUvNC8xNiwgMTE6NDEgQU0sICJPU1BGIG9uIGJlaGFsZiBvZiBBY2VlIExpbmRlbSAoYWNlZSki DQo+PG9zcGYtYm91bmNlc0BpZXRmLm9yZyBvbiBiZWhhbGYgb2YgYWNlZUBjaXNjby5jb20+IHdy b3RlOg0KPg0KPj5UaGUgc3ViamVjdCBkcmFmdCBpcyB2ZXJ5IHN0YWJsZSwgaGFzIG11bHRpcGxl IGludGVyb3BlcmFibGUNCj4+aW1wbGVtZW50YXRpb25zLCBhbmQgbWFueSAoaW5jbHVkaW5nIG15 c2VsZikgaGF2ZSBkb25lIHRob3JvdWdoIHJldmlld3MuDQo+PkkNCj4+YmVsaWV2ZSB3ZSBhcmUg cmVhZHkgZm9yIFdHIGxhc3QgY2FsbCBmb3IgdGhpcyB2ZXJ5IGltcG9ydGFudCBkcmFmdC4NCj4+ DQo+PldpdGggZ3JlYXQgcGxlYXN1cmUsIHRoaXMgYmVnaW5zIHRoZSBXRyBsYXN0IGNhbGwgZm9y IHRoZSBzdWJqZWN0IGRyYWZ0Lg0KPj5QbGVhc2Ugc2VuZCB5b3VyIGNvbW1lbnRzIHRvIHRoaXMg bGlzdCBwcmlvciB0byAxMjowMCBBTSBHTVQsIE1heSAxOXRoLA0KPj4yMDE2Lg0KPj4NCj4+SGVy ZSBpcyBhIFVSTCBmb3IgeW91ciBjb252ZW5hbmNlOg0KPj4NCj4+aHR0cHM6Ly9kYXRhdHJhY2tl ci5pZXRmLm9yZy9kb2MvZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1vc3BmLXNlZ21lbnQtcm91dGluZy1leHRlbnNpbw0K Pj5uDQo+PnMNCj4+Lw0KPj4NCj4+VGhhbmtzLA0KPj5BY2VlDQo+Pg0KPj5fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXw0KPj5PU1BGIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0K Pj5PU1BGQGlldGYub3JnDQo+Pmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8v b3NwZg0KPg0KDQo= From nobody Fri Jun 3 14:58:23 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0156612D56D; Fri, 3 Jun 2016 14:58:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.326 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.326 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OoD4QU-fdGxk; Fri, 3 Jun 2016 14:58:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cappuccino.rob.sh (cappuccino.rob.sh [IPv6:2a03:9800:10:4c::cafe:b00c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0653512D892; Fri, 3 Jun 2016 14:58:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [166.177.248.60] (helo=[10.52.29.37]) by cappuccino.rob.sh with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1b8x6J-00018d-Sw; Fri, 03 Jun 2016 22:57:56 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) From: Rob Shakir X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (13F69) In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2016 14:58:09 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: References: To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" Archived-At: Cc: "draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org" , OSPF WG List Subject: Re: [OSPF] Working Group Last Call for OSPF Extensions for Segment Routing - draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions (Correct Draft Authors E-mail) X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2016 21:58:23 -0000 Hi Acee, I am not aware of any undisclosed IPR on this draft. Kind regards, r. > On Jun 3, 2016, at 14:45, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: > > Authors, > > For the final time, can you confirm whether or not you are aware of any > IPR other than? > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2401/ > https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2233/ (the IPR statement on the non-WG > draft version) > > Thanks, > Acee > >> On 6/2/16, 10:04 AM, "Acee Lindem (acee)" wrote: >> >> The WG last call ended a couple weeks ago and I will act as document >> shepherd and request publication. >> Thanks, >> Acee >> >> On 5/4/16, 11:41 AM, "OSPF on behalf of Acee Lindem (acee)" >> wrote: >> >>> The subject draft is very stable, has multiple interoperable >>> implementations, and many (including myself) have done thorough reviews. >>> I >>> believe we are ready for WG last call for this very important draft. >>> >>> With great pleasure, this begins the WG last call for the subject draft. >>> Please send your comments to this list prior to 12:00 AM GMT, May 19th, >>> 2016. >>> >>> Here is a URL for your convenance: >>> >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensio >>> n >>> s >>> / >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Acee >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> OSPF mailing list >>> OSPF@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf > From nobody Fri Jun 3 15:02:38 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3E1F12D56D; Fri, 3 Jun 2016 15:02:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.7 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ooEruwivrjlG; Fri, 3 Jun 2016 15:02:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pa0-x232.google.com (mail-pa0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E37D12D0E9; Fri, 3 Jun 2016 15:02:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pa0-x232.google.com with SMTP id xk1so17783014pac.2; Fri, 03 Jun 2016 15:02:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=user-agent:date:subject:from:to:cc:message-id:thread-topic :references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=z/2RwnDtZEAb/XTwG3HdgRXdBJuqvvYJyoOW3NlryIc=; b=BMTq9RSX3Z6uaEYlQ4iGkPBMUN+rt4n1Eq7jrhKD7Qyo0kVy1MYiokHy2hGv6D3YLz SdUwQC5R2ytyy97Mo3on9F1ZWouciyHHNdPAOWAud1eZzu6J3CGPmoQIa6bi970Eoz5D /1QxAJ86GCojLBYLf17MUpqhQInenVZUO7ecTLFG9UABjGXc+lcHHwWT23LT7p3GarKd 88OWS14wcFMeuqRdsrNL0hKDK68+YjiUypGILdcELr1EEhxgQXseMt6Zd8YDjkat3Srh rSCl4qXUiw/4BUaC5OLkcgDWEtAp6qWsSdMGQZ3ViUkktzFUogEGBpB4xHk4gtjVnBB8 71ww== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:user-agent:date:subject:from:to:cc:message-id :thread-topic:references:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=z/2RwnDtZEAb/XTwG3HdgRXdBJuqvvYJyoOW3NlryIc=; b=hXNxD5O/SdZzX2FjxSmShYxJGrkt6QVAiqFmkimFqnXwFkpw8vIxo8p/NWo7+Sz1M2 RVYoi0ZvCEIqUwsEm0+/YA2QRPpLKfD/2681fUTdzU/ysx44EfOABicJXX6CCY5gecW8 QnosG3pMFlK/TsM2iP8P3uMKaG8gN2Rsl1DypHo3MZsrljP94uKWrmFMNhyhKxsgzAox VRoK5BXIQ6vc+4kyaQuyr/bp5mKS4yP3PczHoPeIJqWFdCr9B45B8o3GCvL/ZTR/9i0q XYUL4rMLm9Y+0TnOGTmOt8OGtWoZXySExVLYMfEpVTSoRdJmDikWm4n3w6WtUKUaHmeJ mfeQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tIiU0LCz3mOQC1x34BA5fygI36LVZflA/5coyirIFpT5idWqa/vKqvdTyOIqihc8w== X-Received: by 10.66.193.199 with SMTP id hq7mr7525325pac.6.1464991354792; Fri, 03 Jun 2016 15:02:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.28] ([76.126.247.72]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v1sm10506072pfa.93.2016.06.03.15.02.33 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 03 Jun 2016 15:02:34 -0700 (PDT) User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.16.0.160506 Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2016 15:02:33 -0700 From: Jeff Tantsura To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" , OSPF WG List Message-ID: <157A5922-F546-4D6F-BDF1-E139DD3C3997@gmail.com> Thread-Topic: [OSPF] Working Group Last Call for OSPF Extensions for Segment Routing - draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions (Correct Draft Authors E-mail) References: In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Cc: "draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [OSPF] Working Group Last Call for OSPF Extensions for Segment Routing - draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions (Correct Draft Authors E-mail) X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2016 22:02:37 -0000 Hi Acee, I=E2=80=99m not aware of any undisclosed IPR. Thanks, Jeff=20 =20 On 6/3/16, 2:45 PM, "OSPF on behalf of Acee Lindem (acee)" wrote: >Authors,=20 > >For the final time, can you confirm whether or not you are aware of any >IPR other than?=20 > >https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2401/ >https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2233/ (the IPR statement on the non-WG >draft version)=20 > >Thanks, >Acee=20 > >On 6/2/16, 10:04 AM, "Acee Lindem (acee)" wrote: > >>The WG last call ended a couple weeks ago and I will act as document >>shepherd and request publication. >>Thanks, >>Acee=20 >> >>On 5/4/16, 11:41 AM, "OSPF on behalf of Acee Lindem (acee)" >> wrote: >> >>>The subject draft is very stable, has multiple interoperable >>>implementations, and many (including myself) have done thorough reviews. >>>I >>>believe we are ready for WG last call for this very important draft. >>> >>>With great pleasure, this begins the WG last call for the subject draft. >>>Please send your comments to this list prior to 12:00 AM GMT, May 19th, >>>2016. >>> >>>Here is a URL for your convenance: >>> >>>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensi= o >>>n >>>s >>>/ >>> >>>Thanks, >>>Acee >>> >>>_______________________________________________ >>>OSPF mailing list >>>OSPF@ietf.org >>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf >> > >_______________________________________________ >OSPF mailing list >OSPF@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf From nobody Fri Jun 3 19:15:15 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21B7812D10B; Fri, 3 Jun 2016 19:15:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.326 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.326 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BDu8CaxIwEFD; Fri, 3 Jun 2016 19:15:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gilfert.gredler.at (gilfert.gredler.at [87.106.222.165]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D65E712D109; Fri, 3 Jun 2016 19:15:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.2.12] ([::ffff:122.166.206.43]) (AUTH: PLAIN hannes, TLS: TLSv1/SSLv3,256bits,AES256-SHA) by gilfert.gredler.at with ESMTPSA; Sat, 04 Jun 2016 04:15:06 +0200 id 0000000003B5CCAA.00000000575239AA.00005763 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) From: Hannes Gredler X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (13F69) In-Reply-To: Date: Sat, 4 Jun 2016 07:44:59 +0530 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: References: To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" Archived-At: Cc: "draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org" , OSPF WG List Subject: Re: [OSPF] Working Group Last Call for OSPF Extensions for Segment Routing - draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions (Correct Draft Authors E-mail) X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 04 Jun 2016 02:15:13 -0000 not aware about any non-disclosed IPR - /hannes > On 04 Jun 2016, at 03:15, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: > > Authors, > > For the final time, can you confirm whether or not you are aware of any > IPR other than? > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2401/ > https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2233/ (the IPR statement on the non-WG > draft version) > > Thanks, > Acee > >> On 6/2/16, 10:04 AM, "Acee Lindem (acee)" wrote: >> >> The WG last call ended a couple weeks ago and I will act as document >> shepherd and request publication. >> Thanks, >> Acee >> >> On 5/4/16, 11:41 AM, "OSPF on behalf of Acee Lindem (acee)" >> wrote: >> >>> The subject draft is very stable, has multiple interoperable >>> implementations, and many (including myself) have done thorough reviews. >>> I >>> believe we are ready for WG last call for this very important draft. >>> >>> With great pleasure, this begins the WG last call for the subject draft. >>> Please send your comments to this list prior to 12:00 AM GMT, May 19th, >>> 2016. >>> >>> Here is a URL for your convenance: >>> >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensio >>> n >>> s >>> / >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Acee >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> OSPF mailing list >>> OSPF@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf > From nobody Sun Jun 5 02:55:41 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DB4B12D12C; Sun, 5 Jun 2016 02:55:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yYBLEAt4Hdhm; Sun, 5 Jun 2016 02:55:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp-fr.alcatel-lucent.com (fr-hpida-esg-02.alcatel-lucent.com [135.245.210.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E86CF12D522; Sun, 5 Jun 2016 02:55:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fr712umx4.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (unknown [135.245.210.45]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id 07C1748966B51; Sun, 5 Jun 2016 09:55:33 +0000 (GMT) Received: from fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.42]) by fr712umx4.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO-o) with ESMTP id u559tX6Q009946 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sun, 5 Jun 2016 09:55:34 GMT Received: from FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr711wxchhub01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.111]) by fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id u559tXHJ012428 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Sun, 5 Jun 2016 11:55:33 +0200 Received: from FR711WXCHMBA07.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([169.254.3.160]) by FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.239.2.111]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Sun, 5 Jun 2016 11:55:33 +0200 From: "Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE)" To: "acee@cisco.com" , "ospf@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [OSPF] Working Group Last Call for OSPF Extensions for Segment Routing - draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions ( Thread-Index: AQHRvxBmZs1TGQ1ESU+IC691prqZNg== Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2016 09:55:32 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: nl-BE, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/0.0.0.151008 x-originating-ip: [135.239.27.38] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_A2D4C7E67DBE4D8BBCC6E5D6AF2DA031alcatellucentcom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [OSPF] Working Group Last Call for OSPF Extensions for Segment Routing - draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions ( X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2016 09:55:39 -0000 --_000_A2D4C7E67DBE4D8BBCC6E5D6AF2DA031alcatellucentcom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Tm90IGF3YXJlIG9mIElQUiByZWxhdGVkIHRvIHRoaXMgZHJhZnQNCg0KDQpBdXRob3JzLA0KDQpG b3IgdGhlIGZpbmFsIHRpbWUsIGNhbiB5b3UgY29uZmlybSB3aGV0aGVyIG9yIG5vdCB5b3UgYXJl IGF3YXJlIG9mIGFueQ0KSVBSIG90aGVyIHRoYW4/DQoNCmh0dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0 Zi5vcmcvaXByLzI0MDEvDQpodHRwczovL2RhdGF0cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3JnL2lwci8yMjMzLyAo dGhlIElQUiBzdGF0ZW1lbnQgb24gdGhlIG5vbi1XRw0KZHJhZnQgdmVyc2lvbikNCg0KVGhhbmtz LA0KQWNlZQ0KDQpPbiA2LzIvMTYsIDEwOjA0IEFNLCAiQWNlZSBMaW5kZW0gKGFjZWUpIiA8YWNl ZUBjaXNjby5jb20+IHdyb3RlOg0KDQo+VGhlIFdHIGxhc3QgY2FsbCBlbmRlZCBhIGNvdXBsZSB3 ZWVrcyBhZ28gYW5kIEkgd2lsbCBhY3QgYXMgZG9jdW1lbnQNCj5zaGVwaGVyZCBhbmQgcmVxdWVz dCBwdWJsaWNhdGlvbi4NCj5UaGFua3MsDQo+QWNlZQ0KPg0KPk9uIDUvNC8xNiwgMTE6NDEgQU0s ICJPU1BGIG9uIGJlaGFsZiBvZiBBY2VlIExpbmRlbSAoYWNlZSkiDQo+PG9zcGYtYm91bmNlc0Bp ZXRmLm9yZyBvbiBiZWhhbGYgb2YgYWNlZUBjaXNjby5jb20+IHdyb3RlOg0KPg0KPj5UaGUgc3Vi amVjdCBkcmFmdCBpcyB2ZXJ5IHN0YWJsZSwgaGFzIG11bHRpcGxlIGludGVyb3BlcmFibGUNCj4+ aW1wbGVtZW50YXRpb25zLCBhbmQgbWFueSAoaW5jbHVkaW5nIG15c2VsZikgaGF2ZSBkb25lIHRo b3JvdWdoIHJldmlld3MuDQo+PkkNCj4+YmVsaWV2ZSB3ZSBhcmUgcmVhZHkgZm9yIFdHIGxhc3Qg Y2FsbCBmb3IgdGhpcyB2ZXJ5IGltcG9ydGFudCBkcmFmdC4NCj4+DQo+PldpdGggZ3JlYXQgcGxl YXN1cmUsIHRoaXMgYmVnaW5zIHRoZSBXRyBsYXN0IGNhbGwgZm9yIHRoZSBzdWJqZWN0IGRyYWZ0 Lg0KPj5QbGVhc2Ugc2VuZCB5b3VyIGNvbW1lbnRzIHRvIHRoaXMgbGlzdCBwcmlvciB0byAxMjow MCBBTSBHTVQsIE1heSAxOXRoLA0KPj4yMDE2Lg0KPj4NCj4+SGVyZSBpcyBhIFVSTCBmb3IgeW91 ciBjb252ZW5hbmNlOg0KPj4NCj4+aHR0cHM6Ly9kYXRhdHJhY2tlci5pZXRmLm9yZy9kb2MvZHJh ZnQtaWV0Zi1vc3BmLXNlZ21lbnQtcm91dGluZy1leHRlbnNpbw0KPj5uDQo+PnMNCj4+Lw0KPj4N Cj4+VGhhbmtzLA0KPj5BY2VlDQo+Pg0KPj5fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXw0KPj5PU1BGIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KPj5PU1BGQGlldGYub3JnDQo+ Pmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vb3NwZg0KPg0KDQoNCg== --_000_A2D4C7E67DBE4D8BBCC6E5D6AF2DA031alcatellucentcom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <026E8FC24BA73F46B00A681A03CF4D2D@exchange.lucent.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWw+DQo8aGVhZD4NCjxtZXRhIGh0dHAtZXF1aXY9IkNvbnRlbnQtVHlwZSIgY29udGVudD0i dGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PXV0Zi04Ij4NCjwvaGVhZD4NCjxib2R5IHN0eWxlPSJ3b3JkLXdy YXA6IGJyZWFrLXdvcmQ7IC13ZWJraXQtbmJzcC1tb2RlOiBzcGFjZTsgLXdlYmtpdC1saW5lLWJy ZWFrOiBhZnRlci13aGl0ZS1zcGFjZTsgY29sb3I6IHJnYigwLCAwLCAwKTsgZm9udC1zaXplOiAx NHB4OyBmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ2FsaWJyaSwgc2Fucy1zZXJpZjsiPg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8 ZGl2Pg0KPHByZSBjbGFzcz0id29yZHdyYXAiIHN0eWxlPSJtYXJnaW4tdG9wOiAwcHg7IG1hcmdp bi1ib3R0b206IDBweDsgcGFkZGluZzogMHB4OyBib3JkZXI6IDBweDsgZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IENv dXJpZXIsICdDb3VyaWVyIE5ldycsIG1vbm9zcGFjZTsgZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMnB4OyBsaW5lLWhl aWdodDogaW5oZXJpdDsgdmVydGljYWwtYWxpZ246IGJhc2VsaW5lOyB3aGl0ZS1zcGFjZTogcHJl LXdyYXA7IHdvcmQtd3JhcDogYnJlYWstd29yZDsiPk5vdCBhd2FyZSBvZiBJUFIgcmVsYXRlZCB0 byB0aGlzIGRyYWZ0PC9wcmU+DQo8cHJlIGNsYXNzPSJ3b3Jkd3JhcCIgc3R5bGU9Im1hcmdpbi10 b3A6IDBweDsgbWFyZ2luLWJvdHRvbTogMHB4OyBwYWRkaW5nOiAwcHg7IGJvcmRlcjogMHB4OyBm b250LWZhbWlseTogQ291cmllciwgJ0NvdXJpZXIgTmV3JywgbW9ub3NwYWNlOyBmb250LXNpemU6 IDEycHg7IGxpbmUtaGVpZ2h0OiBpbmhlcml0OyB2ZXJ0aWNhbC1hbGlnbjogYmFzZWxpbmU7IHdo aXRlLXNwYWNlOiBwcmUtd3JhcDsgd29yZC13cmFwOiBicmVhay13b3JkOyI+PGJyPjwvcHJlPg0K PHByZSBjbGFzcz0id29yZHdyYXAiIHN0eWxlPSJtYXJnaW4tdG9wOiAwcHg7IG1hcmdpbi1ib3R0 b206IDBweDsgcGFkZGluZzogMHB4OyBib3JkZXI6IDBweDsgZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IENvdXJpZXIs ICdDb3VyaWVyIE5ldycsIG1vbm9zcGFjZTsgZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMnB4OyBsaW5lLWhlaWdodDog aW5oZXJpdDsgdmVydGljYWwtYWxpZ246IGJhc2VsaW5lOyB3aGl0ZS1zcGFjZTogcHJlLXdyYXA7 IHdvcmQtd3JhcDogYnJlYWstd29yZDsiPkF1dGhvcnMsIA0KDQpGb3IgdGhlIGZpbmFsIHRpbWUs IGNhbiB5b3UgY29uZmlybSB3aGV0aGVyIG9yIG5vdCB5b3UgYXJlIGF3YXJlIG9mIGFueQ0KSVBS IG90aGVyIHRoYW4/IA0KDQpodHRwczovL2RhdGF0cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3JnL2lwci8yNDAxLw0K aHR0cHM6Ly9kYXRhdHJhY2tlci5pZXRmLm9yZy9pcHIvMjIzMy8gKHRoZSBJUFIgc3RhdGVtZW50 IG9uIHRoZSBub24tV0cNCmRyYWZ0IHZlcnNpb24pIA0KDQpUaGFua3MsDQpBY2VlIA0KDQpPbiA2 LzIvMTYsIDEwOjA0IEFNLCAmcXVvdDtBY2VlIExpbmRlbSAoYWNlZSkmcXVvdDsgJmx0O2FjZWVA Y2lzY28uY29tJmd0OyB3cm90ZToNCg0KJmd0O1RoZSBXRyBsYXN0IGNhbGwgZW5kZWQgYSBjb3Vw bGUgd2Vla3MgYWdvIGFuZCBJIHdpbGwgYWN0IGFzIGRvY3VtZW50DQomZ3Q7c2hlcGhlcmQgYW5k IHJlcXVlc3QgcHVibGljYXRpb24uDQomZ3Q7VGhhbmtzLA0KJmd0O0FjZWUgDQomZ3Q7DQomZ3Q7 T24gNS80LzE2LCAxMTo0MSBBTSwgJnF1b3Q7T1NQRiBvbiBiZWhhbGYgb2YgQWNlZSBMaW5kZW0g KGFjZWUpJnF1b3Q7DQomZ3Q7Jmx0O29zcGYtYm91bmNlc0BpZXRmLm9yZyBvbiBiZWhhbGYgb2Yg YWNlZUBjaXNjby5jb20mZ3Q7IHdyb3RlOg0KJmd0Ow0KJmd0OyZndDtUaGUgc3ViamVjdCBkcmFm dCBpcyB2ZXJ5IHN0YWJsZSwgaGFzIG11bHRpcGxlIGludGVyb3BlcmFibGUNCiZndDsmZ3Q7aW1w bGVtZW50YXRpb25zLCBhbmQgbWFueSAoaW5jbHVkaW5nIG15c2VsZikgaGF2ZSBkb25lIHRob3Jv dWdoIHJldmlld3MuDQomZ3Q7Jmd0O0kNCiZndDsmZ3Q7YmVsaWV2ZSB3ZSBhcmUgcmVhZHkgZm9y IFdHIGxhc3QgY2FsbCBmb3IgdGhpcyB2ZXJ5IGltcG9ydGFudCBkcmFmdC4NCiZndDsmZ3Q7DQom Z3Q7Jmd0O1dpdGggZ3JlYXQgcGxlYXN1cmUsIHRoaXMgYmVnaW5zIHRoZSBXRyBsYXN0IGNhbGwg Zm9yIHRoZSBzdWJqZWN0IGRyYWZ0Lg0KJmd0OyZndDtQbGVhc2Ugc2VuZCB5b3VyIGNvbW1lbnRz IHRvIHRoaXMgbGlzdCBwcmlvciB0byAxMjowMCBBTSBHTVQsIE1heSAxOXRoLA0KJmd0OyZndDsy MDE2Lg0KJmd0OyZndDsNCiZndDsmZ3Q7SGVyZSBpcyBhIFVSTCBmb3IgeW91ciBjb252ZW5hbmNl Og0KJmd0OyZndDsNCiZndDsmZ3Q7aHR0cHM6Ly9kYXRhdHJhY2tlci5pZXRmLm9yZy9kb2MvZHJh ZnQtaWV0Zi1vc3BmLXNlZ21lbnQtcm91dGluZy1leHRlbnNpbw0KJmd0OyZndDtuDQomZ3Q7Jmd0 O3MNCiZndDsmZ3Q7Lw0KJmd0OyZndDsNCiZndDsmZ3Q7VGhhbmtzLA0KJmd0OyZndDtBY2VlDQom Z3Q7Jmd0Ow0KJmd0OyZndDtfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fXw0KJmd0OyZndDtPU1BGIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KJmd0OyZndDtPU1BGQGlldGYub3Jn DQomZ3Q7Jmd0O2h0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vb3NwZg0KJmd0 Ow0KPC9wcmU+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBpZD0iTUFD X09VVExPT0tfU0lHTkFUVVJFIj48L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvYm9k eT4NCjwvaHRtbD4NCg== --_000_A2D4C7E67DBE4D8BBCC6E5D6AF2DA031alcatellucentcom_-- From nobody Sun Jun 5 12:01:40 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8520212D0BF; Sun, 5 Jun 2016 12:01:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -15.947 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.947 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4nb02yzqVyBX; Sun, 5 Jun 2016 12:01:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from aer-iport-4.cisco.com (aer-iport-4.cisco.com [173.38.203.54]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C4A6E12D1ED; Sun, 5 Jun 2016 12:01:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1471; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1465153295; x=1466362895; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=+f/p50e0/BVt6TLVh7DcZBqEwRpDcvOXEvUr92zLWx8=; b=PsAV2bWEuxB8s5ZtD9KPSaQQxmJ9Q+sjbx9idxk0p2iC5PX7Z4b/pn6E afIKKQ9oORd4Z87rz/66AZv5GCkGMF94uvciFbJ52rV5geLMTyxKsEDof Lxw18hR0ag31a/QSxz39N+hNDHL15/ACByNSCX8q5hhA27cRyC5/icJ1q o=; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.26,423,1459814400"; d="scan'208";a="637847981" Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-4.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 05 Jun 2016 19:01:32 +0000 Received: from [10.60.140.56] (ams-ppsenak-nitro7.cisco.com [10.60.140.56]) by aer-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u55J1WNt024907; Sun, 5 Jun 2016 19:01:32 GMT Message-ID: <5754770D.9080702@cisco.com> Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2016 21:01:33 +0200 From: Peter Psenak User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" , OSPF WG List References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Cc: "draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [OSPF] Working Group Last Call for OSPF Extensions for Segment Routing - draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions (Correct Draft Authors E-mail) X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2016 19:01:38 -0000 Hi Acee, I am not aware of any undisclosed IPR on this draft. thanks, Peter On 6/3/16 23:45 , Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: > Authors, > > For the final time, can you confirm whether or not you are aware of any > IPR other than? > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2401/ > https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2233/ (the IPR statement on the non-WG > draft version) > > Thanks, > Acee > > On 6/2/16, 10:04 AM, "Acee Lindem (acee)" wrote: > >> The WG last call ended a couple weeks ago and I will act as document >> shepherd and request publication. >> Thanks, >> Acee >> >> On 5/4/16, 11:41 AM, "OSPF on behalf of Acee Lindem (acee)" >> wrote: >> >>> The subject draft is very stable, has multiple interoperable >>> implementations, and many (including myself) have done thorough reviews. >>> I >>> believe we are ready for WG last call for this very important draft. >>> >>> With great pleasure, this begins the WG last call for the subject draft. >>> Please send your comments to this list prior to 12:00 AM GMT, May 19th, >>> 2016. >>> >>> Here is a URL for your convenance: >>> >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensio >>> n >>> s >>> / >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Acee >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> OSPF mailing list >>> OSPF@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf >> > From nobody Mon Jun 6 05:45:32 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3DA212B061; Mon, 6 Jun 2016 05:45:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -15.947 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.947 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jKYUoGBJyVod; Mon, 6 Jun 2016 05:45:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com [173.37.86.74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 26AE912D0D3; Mon, 6 Jun 2016 05:45:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2082; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1465217128; x=1466426728; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=DP1xM1FCdW782UoYcwEC6OtcyiY2jo3zgwwgJAn7UK4=; b=cqN9NzniJOzUYs8hsqrofpKjGMtZkiVxJHlcMqXC4HNdfGNJcjEC8xw6 mj3YWprzQX3dTAfxNiwMPAdVpZKbkpga2BmJPB8eCLqZS712sMmukxdB0 3dg7tHcQbUloNXNV0zV/jgq9Bnwa5fK+g+t2d2CFjNFZjzNmRRtfVQwyJ I=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0ABAgCWb1VX/5FdJa1bgzpWbg8GulOBe?= =?us-ascii?q?hcNhW4CHIEXOBQBAQEBAQEBZSeERQEBAQMBAQEBGgYROgsFCwIBCBgCAh8HAgI?= =?us-ascii?q?CJQsVEAIEDgWIJwgOqWyQdgEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARcFgQGFJoF3g?= =?us-ascii?q?laEQIMBK4IuBZhIAYYCiCOBaYRQiGWPWQEeNoI5gTVuiRp/AQEB?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.26,427,1459814400"; d="scan'208";a="115631758" Received: from rcdn-core-9.cisco.com ([173.37.93.145]) by rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 Jun 2016 12:45:27 +0000 Received: from XCH-RTP-011.cisco.com (xch-rtp-011.cisco.com [64.101.220.151]) by rcdn-core-9.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u56CjQ6W011752 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 6 Jun 2016 12:45:27 GMT Received: from xch-rtp-010.cisco.com (64.101.220.150) by XCH-RTP-011.cisco.com (64.101.220.151) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Mon, 6 Jun 2016 08:45:26 -0400 Received: from xch-rtp-010.cisco.com ([64.101.220.150]) by XCH-RTP-010.cisco.com ([64.101.220.150]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Mon, 6 Jun 2016 08:45:26 -0400 From: "Stefano Previdi (sprevidi)" To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" Thread-Topic: [OSPF] Working Group Last Call for OSPF Extensions for Segment Routing - draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions (Correct Draft Authors E-mail) Thread-Index: AQHRv/FMieQTrbGfhUKI6yZAyuKmpg== Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2016 12:45:25 +0000 Message-ID: <11D39005-FC94-453B-B927-B3D8B3DECF26@cisco.com> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.61.168.229] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <05C1A7BABE58164EB0D7F63032C2688F@emea.cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org" , OSPF WG List Subject: Re: [OSPF] Working Group Last Call for OSPF Extensions for Segment Routing - draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions (Correct Draft Authors E-mail) X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2016 12:45:30 -0000 SGksDQoNCknigJltIG5vdCBhd2FyZSBvZiBhbnkgdW5kaXNjbG9zZWQgSVBSIHJlbGF0ZWQgdG8g dGhpcyBkcmFmdC4NCg0Kcy4NCg0KDQo+IE9uIEp1biAzLCAyMDE2LCBhdCAxMTo0NSBQTSwgQWNl ZSBMaW5kZW0gKGFjZWUpIDxhY2VlQGNpc2NvLmNvbT4gd3JvdGU6DQo+IA0KPiBBdXRob3JzLCAN Cj4gDQo+IEZvciB0aGUgZmluYWwgdGltZSwgY2FuIHlvdSBjb25maXJtIHdoZXRoZXIgb3Igbm90 IHlvdSBhcmUgYXdhcmUgb2YgYW55DQo+IElQUiBvdGhlciB0aGFuPyANCj4gDQo+IGh0dHBzOi8v ZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0Zi5vcmcvaXByLzI0MDEvDQo+IGh0dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0 Zi5vcmcvaXByLzIyMzMvICh0aGUgSVBSIHN0YXRlbWVudCBvbiB0aGUgbm9uLVdHDQo+IGRyYWZ0 IHZlcnNpb24pIA0KPiANCj4gVGhhbmtzLA0KPiBBY2VlIA0KPiANCj4gT24gNi8yLzE2LCAxMDow NCBBTSwgIkFjZWUgTGluZGVtIChhY2VlKSIgPGFjZWVAY2lzY28uY29tPiB3cm90ZToNCj4gDQo+ PiBUaGUgV0cgbGFzdCBjYWxsIGVuZGVkIGEgY291cGxlIHdlZWtzIGFnbyBhbmQgSSB3aWxsIGFj dCBhcyBkb2N1bWVudA0KPj4gc2hlcGhlcmQgYW5kIHJlcXVlc3QgcHVibGljYXRpb24uDQo+PiBU aGFua3MsDQo+PiBBY2VlIA0KPj4gDQo+PiBPbiA1LzQvMTYsIDExOjQxIEFNLCAiT1NQRiBvbiBi ZWhhbGYgb2YgQWNlZSBMaW5kZW0gKGFjZWUpIg0KPj4gPG9zcGYtYm91bmNlc0BpZXRmLm9yZyBv biBiZWhhbGYgb2YgYWNlZUBjaXNjby5jb20+IHdyb3RlOg0KPj4gDQo+Pj4gVGhlIHN1YmplY3Qg ZHJhZnQgaXMgdmVyeSBzdGFibGUsIGhhcyBtdWx0aXBsZSBpbnRlcm9wZXJhYmxlDQo+Pj4gaW1w bGVtZW50YXRpb25zLCBhbmQgbWFueSAoaW5jbHVkaW5nIG15c2VsZikgaGF2ZSBkb25lIHRob3Jv dWdoIHJldmlld3MuDQo+Pj4gSQ0KPj4+IGJlbGlldmUgd2UgYXJlIHJlYWR5IGZvciBXRyBsYXN0 IGNhbGwgZm9yIHRoaXMgdmVyeSBpbXBvcnRhbnQgZHJhZnQuDQo+Pj4gDQo+Pj4gV2l0aCBncmVh dCBwbGVhc3VyZSwgdGhpcyBiZWdpbnMgdGhlIFdHIGxhc3QgY2FsbCBmb3IgdGhlIHN1YmplY3Qg ZHJhZnQuDQo+Pj4gUGxlYXNlIHNlbmQgeW91ciBjb21tZW50cyB0byB0aGlzIGxpc3QgcHJpb3Ig dG8gMTI6MDAgQU0gR01ULCBNYXkgMTl0aCwNCj4+PiAyMDE2Lg0KPj4+IA0KPj4+IEhlcmUgaXMg YSBVUkwgZm9yIHlvdXIgY29udmVuYW5jZToNCj4+PiANCj4+PiBodHRwczovL2RhdGF0cmFja2Vy LmlldGYub3JnL2RvYy9kcmFmdC1pZXRmLW9zcGYtc2VnbWVudC1yb3V0aW5nLWV4dGVuc2lvDQo+ Pj4gbg0KPj4+IHMNCj4+PiAvDQo+Pj4gDQo+Pj4gVGhhbmtzLA0KPj4+IEFjZWUNCj4+PiANCj4+ PiBfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXw0KPj4+IE9T UEYgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQo+Pj4gT1NQRkBpZXRmLm9yZw0KPj4+IGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYu b3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vb3NwZg0KPj4gDQo+IA0KDQo= From nobody Mon Jun 6 06:58:59 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BF9112D5AA; Mon, 6 Jun 2016 06:58:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -15.948 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.948 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ASVad_9XSSO7; Mon, 6 Jun 2016 06:58:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from aer-iport-1.cisco.com (aer-iport-1.cisco.com [173.38.203.51]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A299112D0F4; Mon, 6 Jun 2016 06:58:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2098; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1465221534; x=1466431134; h=subject:references:to:from:message-id:date:mime-version: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=e0CqPHy0RoYi/kJQ8EP1ECIQ3xa4lGwgvzkaE6NA//A=; b=mnr5QO/PdXvBom/MaKnuNifx/VP34HMc26puUWcpfhmT00SmeqkEUA/H FbVm3CYpbSyxY39AIjGip4xy+Vb7StnwpYULjjMevBsT9Lq8MkUJKlVdu AF00jAqEk7WnM2Wqgb3d59AbeSGMulF1S4z152eJsHYBrUK6dx7UcnGSS U=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0DPAQAJgVVX/xbLJq1bhBB9ulmBehcNh?= =?us-ascii?q?W4CgWsUAQEBAQEBAWUnhEUBAQEDAQEBARoGDwEFNgoGCxwDAQIBAgIFFgQHAgI?= =?us-ascii?q?JAwIBAgEVKAgHDAYCAQGIIwgOqhKQfwEBAQEBBQEBAQEBARwFgQGFJowOglkBB?= =?us-ascii?q?JhIhgOII4FphFCDCYVaAo9aHjaCOYE3OjKKGQEBAQ?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.26,427,1459814400"; d="scan'208";a="677573507" Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-4.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 Jun 2016 13:58:52 +0000 Received: from [10.61.235.140] ([10.61.235.140]) by aer-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u56Dwqoo019019; Mon, 6 Jun 2016 13:58:52 GMT References: To: draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org, ospf@ietf.org From: Clarence Filsfils X-Forwarded-Message-Id: Message-ID: <5755819C.7030102@cisco.com> Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2016 15:58:52 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: [OSPF] Working Group Last Call for OSPF Extensions for Segment Routing - draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions (Correct Draft Authors E-mail) X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2016 13:58:57 -0000 I’m not aware of any undisclosed IPR related to this draft. Cheers, Clarence > From: Stefano Previdi > Subject: Re: [OSPF] Working Group Last Call for OSPF Extensions for Segment Routing - draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions (Correct Draft Authors E-mail) > Date: June 6, 2016 at 2:45:23 PM GMT+2 > To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" > Cc: OSPF WG List , "draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org" > > Hi, > > I’m not aware of any undisclosed IPR related to this draft. > > s. > > >> On Jun 3, 2016, at 11:45 PM, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: >> >> Authors, >> >> For the final time, can you confirm whether or not you are aware of any >> IPR other than? >> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2401/ >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2233/ (the IPR statement on the non-WG >> draft version) >> >> Thanks, >> Acee >> >> On 6/2/16, 10:04 AM, "Acee Lindem (acee)" wrote: >> >>> The WG last call ended a couple weeks ago and I will act as document >>> shepherd and request publication. >>> Thanks, >>> Acee >>> >>> On 5/4/16, 11:41 AM, "OSPF on behalf of Acee Lindem (acee)" >>> wrote: >>> >>>> The subject draft is very stable, has multiple interoperable >>>> implementations, and many (including myself) have done thorough reviews. >>>> I >>>> believe we are ready for WG last call for this very important draft. >>>> >>>> With great pleasure, this begins the WG last call for the subject draft. >>>> Please send your comments to this list prior to 12:00 AM GMT, May 19th, >>>> 2016. >>>> >>>> Here is a URL for your convenance: >>>> >>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensio >>>> n >>>> s >>>> / >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Acee >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> OSPF mailing list >>>> OSPF@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf >>> >> > From nobody Thu Jun 9 12:58:02 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FE2312D0B3 for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2016 12:58:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cDFeAFeYX09y for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2016 12:57:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qg0-x235.google.com (mail-qg0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c04::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DA2B612D150 for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2016 12:57:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qg0-x235.google.com with SMTP id p34so26235992qgp.1 for ; Thu, 09 Jun 2016 12:57:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=yHfDWgYaSBF0xOiqhJpuXAJQgbeTte+y3P/p5c66oFE=; b=oRzhuDaIatGCxEbbC4aLNSdmrPepUMS17A/m0x0LSS4cdgIneeHn2DWzAoDl0kcTsF gjKvJxL0/Wchz8QZHeFthav3IB1M7ymW5kOrSB3DbZsODFtVv0ewEN+B/zH+saUXUeZ+ 3Anj0HRjCKMHd7QMjGp8d93KcUuzSIP4ohbMGjkKxYgl+6I0w4h4RREKbQ8UqrYI18re cv3ko/T/ll3c3kluzQr9kKZFPlmJhDbCYNouR3HvNpmxzI9SHfC5NuHmQ83danGScwOe bBig4Otxlrgykeu48pHg76KHAF9U0Q47SCLSSE83Xq63F2vSbqvOHalNRpHiKTb3ttIu tqGw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=yHfDWgYaSBF0xOiqhJpuXAJQgbeTte+y3P/p5c66oFE=; b=hvDdKuLuEwu7dlZJEUP6QX1/36T6AWGswRn+z6LuCiHE0+GoX743SH1kSP6+my57ld LwIH6zkx/TeXPJnXKmcXk3IQTp9IdYgsivJa3RV4kiRMhd7jlpUcul+LCiv/29IbIB5t rFfBF3itHD9AXFXGVZZsvtajCSHt0Tc10dXsi8suKwGTLL6VQu6OhpdfH4qVtq1mn3Tx IpPViCYDh88IHla0dzZOsyp6GhQRfM5bBsBR0GkiUJxGteeqP/A7h78JyzLC0Ll0/R2D 7RVZFeeoi5PQsqaOmMUmgjBLtjVJk0vjo5HUEO99bKdDtskv1eI+Q/ERfqIphqcSeHXx NSXw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tK1kYhpe+BoC9uwjc7Z/vdfgS3UV6YkeekBpSXSFKhKWB1qJYqBaWSk7utpB1CTFPV2y+yo/At12voZPQ== X-Received: by 10.140.108.183 with SMTP id j52mr11459042qgf.90.1465502278017; Thu, 09 Jun 2016 12:57:58 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.200.57.81 with HTTP; Thu, 9 Jun 2016 12:57:57 -0700 (PDT) From: Alia Atlas Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 15:57:57 -0400 Message-ID: To: OSPF List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113a6860b2e9010534ddd6df Archived-At: Subject: [OSPF] AD review of draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3-07 X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2016 19:58:00 -0000 --001a113a6860b2e9010534ddd6df Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 As is customary, I have done my AD review of draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3-07. First, I would like to thank the authors for their work on this document. It looks like very useful technology. I have a few minor questions below. I will put this into IETF Last Call as well while waiting for the authors to update the draft ASAP. That gives a chance of making it on to the June 30 telechat if the authors are responsive. Minor: 1) Sec 3.1: "If this is supported, the IPv4 data plane MUST resolve the layer-2 address using Address Resolution Protocol (ARP) on multi-access networks and point-to-point over LAN [RFC5309] for direct next-hops on different IPv4 subnets." I believe it is the IPv4 (i.e. layer-3) address to be resolved with ARP - not the layer-2 address. 2) Sec 3.3: "If IPv4 transport, as specified herein, is used for IPv6 address families, virtual links cannot be supported. Hence, it is RECOMMENDED to use the IP transport matching the address family in OSPF routing domains requiring virtual links." From this section, I was expecting that "cannot" would be a "can". Did I miss something? Can you clarify further? 3) Sec 1: 2nd to last paragraph: "In situations where the IPv6 deployment is a proper superset of the IPv4 deployment, it is expected that OSPFv3 would be transported over IPv6." I believe the "proper" should be removed. If the IPv6 deployment is exactly the same as the IPv4 deployment, then it is expected that OSPFv3 would be transported over IPv6. As it is,how the case of equal deployment is handled is unspecified. Thanks, Alia --001a113a6860b2e9010534ddd6df Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
As is customary, I have done my AD review of=C2=A0dra= ft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3-07.
First, I would like to = thank the authors for their work on this document.=C2=A0 It looks like
very useful technology.

I have a few minor q= uestions below.=C2=A0 I will put this into IETF Last Call as well while
waiting for the authors to update the draft ASAP. =C2=A0 That gives = a chance of making it
on to the June 30 telechat if the authors a= re responsive.

Minor:

1) = Sec 3.1: =C2=A0"If this is supported, the IPv4 data plane MUST resolve=
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0the layer-2 address using Address Resolution Protoc= ol (ARP) on
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0multi-access networks and point-to-point= over LAN [RFC5309] for
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0direct next-hops on differen= t IPv4 subnets."

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0I believ= e it is the IPv4 (i.e. layer-3) address to be resolved with ARP - not the= =C2=A0
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0layer-2 address. =C2=A0

=
2) Sec 3.3:=C2=A0"If IPv4 transport, as specified=C2=A0here= in, is used for IPv6 address=C2=A0
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0families, = virtual links cannot be
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0supported. Hence, it is RECO= MMENDED to use the IP transport
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0matching the address= family in OSPF routing domains requiring
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0virtual li= nks."

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0From this section, = I was expecting that "cannot" would be a "can".=C2=A0 D= id
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0I miss something?=C2=A0 Can you clarify fu= rther?

3) Sec 1: 2nd to last paragraph:=C2=A0"= ;In situations where the IPv6 deployment is a
=C2=A0 =C2=A0pr= oper superset of the IPv4 deployment, it is expected that OSPFv3
=C2=A0 = =C2=A0would be transported over IPv6." =C2=A0=C2=A0

=
=C2=A0 =C2=A0I believe the "proper" should be removed.= =C2=A0 If the IPv6 deployment is exactly the same
=C2=A0 =C2=A0a= s the IPv4 deployment, then it is expected that OSPFv3 would be transported= over
=C2=A0 =C2=A0IPv6. =C2=A0 =C2=A0 As it is,how the case of e= qual deployment is handled is unspecified.

Thanks,=
Alia
--001a113a6860b2e9010534ddd6df-- From nobody Thu Jun 9 13:51:58 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietf.org Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E974312D106; Thu, 9 Jun 2016 13:51:48 -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: 6.21.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Sender: Message-ID: <20160609205148.16741.34606.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2016 13:51:48 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: ospf@ietf.org, draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3@ietf.org, ospf-chairs@ietf.org, "wenhu.lu@gmail.com" Subject: [OSPF] Last Call: (OSPFv3 over IPv4 for IPv6 Transition) to Proposed Standard X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2016 20:51:57 -0000 The IESG has received a request from the Open Shortest Path First IGP WG (ospf) to consider the following document: - 'OSPFv3 over IPv4 for IPv6 Transition' 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 2016-06-23. 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 This document defines a mechanism to use IPv4 to transport OSPFv3 packets. Using OSPFv3 over IPv4 with the existing OSPFv3 Address Family extension can simplify transition from an OSPFv2 IPv4-only routing domain to an OSPFv3 dual-stack routing domain. This document updates RFC 5838 to support virtual links in the IPv4 unicast address family when using OSPFv3 over IPv4. The file can be obtained via https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3/ IESG discussion can be tracked via https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3/ballot/ No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D. From nobody Thu Jun 9 15:42:35 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C89F112D5CB for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2016 15:42:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -15.946 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.946 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0L6hJ_JLu9pi for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2016 15:42:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 32DEB12B05B for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2016 15:42:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=11255; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1465512152; x=1466721752; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: mime-version; bh=qMtSwboUkrz80nOMSNWkZLenwn++oZz2KqJHr/XAbGY=; b=I9+8DE102rkR9bQaacDe2o4giMlgxEhpy5xpJDgB5N+6nClRCkyWoi72 PVP+oRj/TlknhPg6Wu955YplKbSfWndcx14q1sAa/1caHlcL4zeOPUvcU kXy4zvmR7qW+QzJoLffCEOlhqOE6IC7r7kLmHJquM9y0pxFd2ZLj1YkdB g=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0BBAgCi71lX/4UNJK1egnBOgVMGrxaHA?= =?us-ascii?q?IJwgg+BeoYTAhyBIDgUAQEBAQEBAWUnhEUBAQEEI2YCAQgOAwMBAigDAgICHxE?= =?us-ascii?q?UCQgCBAESiBUDF61kjG0Ng3sBAQEBAQEBAQIBAQEBAQEBIIp0gkOCHYJhglkFk?= =?us-ascii?q?zyEZTQBjCyBeoFpjTeGQIE5h2sBHjaCBxyBS26JCX8BAQE?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.26,447,1459814400"; d="scan'208,217";a="111360517" Received: from alln-core-11.cisco.com ([173.36.13.133]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 09 Jun 2016 22:42:31 +0000 Received: from XCH-RTP-012.cisco.com (xch-rtp-012.cisco.com [64.101.220.152]) by alln-core-11.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u59MgUOZ022356 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 9 Jun 2016 22:42:31 GMT Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) by XCH-RTP-012.cisco.com (64.101.220.152) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Thu, 9 Jun 2016 18:42:30 -0400 Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Thu, 9 Jun 2016 18:42:30 -0400 From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" To: Alia Atlas , OSPF List Thread-Topic: [OSPF] AD review of draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3-07 Thread-Index: AQHRwok+uUYZzsz18kaAeu9BATV60Z/hu1EA Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 22:42:30 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.116.152.196] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_D37F677263F09aceeciscocom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [OSPF] AD review of draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3-07 X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2016 22:42:34 -0000 --_000_D37F677263F09aceeciscocom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 SGkgQWxpYSwNCg0KVGhhbmtzIGZvciB0aGUgcmV2aWV3IC0geW91IGNhdWdodCBzb21lIHJhdGhl ciBzdWJ0bGUgcG9pbnRzLg0KDQpGcm9tOiBPU1BGIDxvc3BmLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmc8bWFp bHRvOm9zcGYtYm91bmNlc0BpZXRmLm9yZz4+IG9uIGJlaGFsZiBvZiBBbGlhIEF0bGFzIDxha2F0 bGFzQGdtYWlsLmNvbTxtYWlsdG86YWthdGxhc0BnbWFpbC5jb20+Pg0KRGF0ZTogVGh1cnNkYXks IEp1bmUgOSwgMjAxNiBhdCAzOjU3IFBNDQpUbzogT1NQRiBXRyBMaXN0IDxvc3BmQGlldGYub3Jn PG1haWx0bzpvc3BmQGlldGYub3JnPj4NClN1YmplY3Q6IFtPU1BGXSBBRCByZXZpZXcgb2YgZHJh ZnQtaWV0Zi1vc3BmLXRyYW5zaXRpb24tdG8tb3NwZnYzLTA3DQoNCkFzIGlzIGN1c3RvbWFyeSwg SSBoYXZlIGRvbmUgbXkgQUQgcmV2aWV3IG9mIGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtb3NwZi10cmFuc2l0aW9uLXRv LW9zcGZ2My0wNy4NCkZpcnN0LCBJIHdvdWxkIGxpa2UgdG8gdGhhbmsgdGhlIGF1dGhvcnMgZm9y IHRoZWlyIHdvcmsgb24gdGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudC4gIEl0IGxvb2tzIGxpa2UNCnZlcnkgdXNlZnVs IHRlY2hub2xvZ3kuDQoNCkkgaGF2ZSBhIGZldyBtaW5vciBxdWVzdGlvbnMgYmVsb3cuICBJIHdp bGwgcHV0IHRoaXMgaW50byBJRVRGIExhc3QgQ2FsbCBhcyB3ZWxsIHdoaWxlDQp3YWl0aW5nIGZv ciB0aGUgYXV0aG9ycyB0byB1cGRhdGUgdGhlIGRyYWZ0IEFTQVAuICAgVGhhdCBnaXZlcyBhIGNo YW5jZSBvZiBtYWtpbmcgaXQNCm9uIHRvIHRoZSBKdW5lIDMwIHRlbGVjaGF0IGlmIHRoZSBhdXRo b3JzIGFyZSByZXNwb25zaXZlLg0KDQpNaW5vcjoNCg0KMSkgU2VjIDMuMTogICJJZiB0aGlzIGlz IHN1cHBvcnRlZCwgdGhlIElQdjQgZGF0YSBwbGFuZSBNVVNUIHJlc29sdmUNCiAgICAgdGhlIGxh eWVyLTIgYWRkcmVzcyB1c2luZyBBZGRyZXNzIFJlc29sdXRpb24gUHJvdG9jb2wgKEFSUCkgb24N CiAgICAgbXVsdGktYWNjZXNzIG5ldHdvcmtzIGFuZCBwb2ludC10by1wb2ludCBvdmVyIExBTiBb UkZDNTMwOV0gZm9yDQogICAgIGRpcmVjdCBuZXh0LWhvcHMgb24gZGlmZmVyZW50IElQdjQgc3Vi bmV0cy4iDQoNCiAgICAgSSBiZWxpZXZlIGl0IGlzIHRoZSBJUHY0IChpLmUuIGxheWVyLTMpIGFk ZHJlc3MgdG8gYmUgcmVzb2x2ZWQgd2l0aCBBUlAgLSBub3QgdGhlDQogICAgIGxheWVyLTIgYWRk cmVzcy4NCg0KT2sgLSB0aGlzIHRleHQgY29tZXMgZnJvbSBtZSBhbmQgSSB3YXMgdmlld2luZyBy ZXNvbHV0aW9uIGZyb20gdGhlIHN0YW5kcG9pbnQgb2YgdGhlIOKAnHRv4oCdIGFkZHJlc3MgZmFt aWx5IHJhdGhlciB0aGFuIHRoZSDigJxmcm9t4oCdIGFkZHJlc3MgZmFtaWx5LiBJIGFncmVlIHRo ZSDigJxmcm9t4oCdIGFkZHJlc3MgZmFtaWx5IGlzIHByb2JhYmx5IGEgbW9yZSBjb21tb24gY2hh cmFjdGVyaXphdGlvbi4NCg0KDQoNCjIpIFNlYyAzLjM6ICJJZiBJUHY0IHRyYW5zcG9ydCwgYXMg c3BlY2lmaWVkIGhlcmVpbiwgaXMgdXNlZCBmb3IgSVB2NiBhZGRyZXNzDQogICAgIGZhbWlsaWVz LCB2aXJ0dWFsIGxpbmtzIGNhbm5vdCBiZQ0KICAgICBzdXBwb3J0ZWQuIEhlbmNlLCBpdCBpcyBS RUNPTU1FTkRFRCB0byB1c2UgdGhlIElQIHRyYW5zcG9ydA0KICAgICBtYXRjaGluZyB0aGUgYWRk cmVzcyBmYW1pbHkgaW4gT1NQRiByb3V0aW5nIGRvbWFpbnMgcmVxdWlyaW5nDQogICAgIHZpcnR1 YWwgbGlua3MuIg0KDQogICAgIEZyb20gdGhpcyBzZWN0aW9uLCBJIHdhcyBleHBlY3RpbmcgdGhh dCAiY2Fubm90IiB3b3VsZCBiZSBhICJjYW4iLiAgRGlkDQogICAgIEkgbWlzcyBzb21ldGhpbmc/ ICBDYW4geW91IGNsYXJpZnkgZnVydGhlcj8NCg0KVGhlIGRyYWZ0IGRvZXNu4oCZdCBhZGRyZXNz IHZpcnR1YWwgbGluayBzdXBwb3J0IGluIGRlcGxveW1lbnRzIHdoZXJlIHRoZSBhZGRyZXNzLWZh bWlseSBkb2VzbuKAmXQgbWF0Y2ggdGhlIHRyYW5zcG9ydC4gSGVuY2UsIHRoZSB0ZXh0IGlzIGNv cnJlY3QgYXMgd3JpdHRlbi4NCg0KDQoNCjMpIFNlYyAxOiAybmQgdG8gbGFzdCBwYXJhZ3JhcGg6 ICJJbiBzaXR1YXRpb25zIHdoZXJlIHRoZSBJUHY2IGRlcGxveW1lbnQgaXMgYQ0KICAgcHJvcGVy IHN1cGVyc2V0IG9mIHRoZSBJUHY0IGRlcGxveW1lbnQsIGl0IGlzIGV4cGVjdGVkIHRoYXQgT1NQ RnYzDQogICB3b3VsZCBiZSB0cmFuc3BvcnRlZCBvdmVyIElQdjYuIg0KDQogICBJIGJlbGlldmUg dGhlICJwcm9wZXIiIHNob3VsZCBiZSByZW1vdmVkLiAgIElmIHRoZSBJUHY2IGRlcGxveW1lbnQg aXMgZXhhY3RseSB0aGUgc2FtZQ0KICAgYXMgdGhlIElQdjQgZGVwbG95bWVudCwgdGhlbiBpdCBp cyBleHBlY3RlZCB0aGF0IE9TUEZ2MyB3b3VsZCBiZSB0cmFuc3BvcnRlZCBvdmVyDQogICBJUHY2 LiAgICAgQXMgaXQgaXMsaG93IHRoZSBjYXNlIG9mIGVxdWFsIGRlcGxveW1lbnQgaXMgaGFuZGxl ZCBpcyB1bnNwZWNpZmllZC4NCg0KSSBhZ3JlZS4gV2Ugd2lsbCByZW1vdmUg4oCccHJvcGVyIi4N Cg0KVGhhbmtzLA0KQWNlZQ0KDQoNCg0KVGhhbmtzLA0KQWxpYQ0K --_000_D37F677263F09aceeciscocom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWw+DQo8aGVhZD4NCjxtZXRhIGh0dHAtZXF1aXY9IkNvbnRlbnQtVHlwZSIgY29udGVudD0i dGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PXV0Zi04Ij4NCjwvaGVhZD4NCjxib2R5IHN0eWxlPSJ3b3JkLXdy YXA6IGJyZWFrLXdvcmQ7IC13ZWJraXQtbmJzcC1tb2RlOiBzcGFjZTsgLXdlYmtpdC1saW5lLWJy ZWFrOiBhZnRlci13aGl0ZS1zcGFjZTsgY29sb3I6IHJnYigwLCAwLCAwKTsgZm9udC1zaXplOiAx NHB4OyBmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ2FsaWJyaSwgc2Fucy1zZXJpZjsiPg0KPGRpdj5IaSBBbGlhLCZu YnNwOzwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj48YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+VGhhbmtzIGZvciB0aGUgcmV2aWV3 IC0geW91IGNhdWdodCBzb21lIHJhdGhlciBzdWJ0bGUgcG9pbnRzLiZuYnNwOzwvZGl2Pg0KPGRp dj48YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxzcGFuIGlkPSJPTEtfU1JDX0JPRFlfU0VDVElPTiI+DQo8ZGl2IHN0 eWxlPSJmb250LWZhbWlseTpDYWxpYnJpOyBmb250LXNpemU6MTFwdDsgdGV4dC1hbGlnbjpsZWZ0 OyBjb2xvcjpibGFjazsgQk9SREVSLUJPVFRPTTogbWVkaXVtIG5vbmU7IEJPUkRFUi1MRUZUOiBt ZWRpdW0gbm9uZTsgUEFERElORy1CT1RUT006IDBpbjsgUEFERElORy1MRUZUOiAwaW47IFBBRERJ TkctUklHSFQ6IDBpbjsgQk9SREVSLVRPUDogI2I1YzRkZiAxcHQgc29saWQ7IEJPUkRFUi1SSUdI VDogbWVkaXVtIG5vbmU7IFBBRERJTkctVE9QOiAzcHQiPg0KPHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtd2Vp Z2h0OmJvbGQiPkZyb206IDwvc3Bhbj5PU1BGICZsdDs8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86b3NwZi1ib3Vu Y2VzQGlldGYub3JnIj5vc3BmLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmc8L2E+Jmd0OyBvbiBiZWhhbGYgb2Yg QWxpYSBBdGxhcyAmbHQ7PGEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOmFrYXRsYXNAZ21haWwuY29tIj5ha2F0bGFz QGdtYWlsLmNvbTwvYT4mZ3Q7PGJyPg0KPHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtd2VpZ2h0OmJvbGQiPkRh dGU6IDwvc3Bhbj5UaHVyc2RheSwgSnVuZSA5LCAyMDE2IGF0IDM6NTcgUE08YnI+DQo8c3BhbiBz dHlsZT0iZm9udC13ZWlnaHQ6Ym9sZCI+VG86IDwvc3Bhbj5PU1BGIFdHIExpc3QgJmx0OzxhIGhy ZWY9Im1haWx0bzpvc3BmQGlldGYub3JnIj5vc3BmQGlldGYub3JnPC9hPiZndDs8YnI+DQo8c3Bh biBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC13ZWlnaHQ6Ym9sZCI+U3ViamVjdDogPC9zcGFuPltPU1BGXSBBRCByZXZp ZXcgb2YgZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1vc3BmLXRyYW5zaXRpb24tdG8tb3NwZnYzLTA3PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+ DQo8ZGl2Pjxicj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGJsb2NrcXVvdGUgaWQ9Ik1BQ19PVVRMT09LX0FUVFJJQlVU SU9OX0JMT0NLUVVPVEUiIHN0eWxlPSJCT1JERVItTEVGVDogI2I1YzRkZiA1IHNvbGlkOyBQQURE SU5HOjAgMCAwIDU7IE1BUkdJTjowIDAgMCA1OyI+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXYgZGlyPSJs dHIiPg0KPGRpdj5BcyBpcyBjdXN0b21hcnksIEkgaGF2ZSBkb25lIG15IEFEIHJldmlldyBvZiZu YnNwO2RyYWZ0LWlldGYtb3NwZi10cmFuc2l0aW9uLXRvLW9zcGZ2My0wNy48YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4N CjxkaXY+Rmlyc3QsIEkgd291bGQgbGlrZSB0byB0aGFuayB0aGUgYXV0aG9ycyBmb3IgdGhlaXIg d29yayBvbiB0aGlzIGRvY3VtZW50LiZuYnNwOyBJdCBsb29rcyBsaWtlPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2PnZl cnkgdXNlZnVsIHRlY2hub2xvZ3kuPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pjxicj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj5JIGhh dmUgYSBmZXcgbWlub3IgcXVlc3Rpb25zIGJlbG93LiZuYnNwOyBJIHdpbGwgcHV0IHRoaXMgaW50 byBJRVRGIExhc3QgQ2FsbCBhcyB3ZWxsIHdoaWxlPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2PndhaXRpbmcgZm9yIHRo ZSBhdXRob3JzIHRvIHVwZGF0ZSB0aGUgZHJhZnQgQVNBUC4gJm5ic3A7IFRoYXQgZ2l2ZXMgYSBj aGFuY2Ugb2YgbWFraW5nIGl0PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pm9uIHRvIHRoZSBKdW5lIDMwIHRlbGVjaGF0 IGlmIHRoZSBhdXRob3JzIGFyZSByZXNwb25zaXZlLjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj48YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4N CjxkaXY+TWlub3I6PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pjxicj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4xKSBTZWMgMy4xOiAm bmJzcDsmcXVvdDtJZiB0aGlzIGlzIHN1cHBvcnRlZCwgdGhlIElQdjQgZGF0YSBwbGFuZSBNVVNU IHJlc29sdmU8YnI+DQombmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwO3RoZSBsYXllci0yIGFkZHJlc3MgdXNp bmcgQWRkcmVzcyBSZXNvbHV0aW9uIFByb3RvY29sIChBUlApIG9uPGJyPg0KJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNw OyAmbmJzcDttdWx0aS1hY2Nlc3MgbmV0d29ya3MgYW5kIHBvaW50LXRvLXBvaW50IG92ZXIgTEFO IFtSRkM1MzA5XSBmb3I8YnI+DQombmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwO2RpcmVjdCBuZXh0LWhvcHMg b24gZGlmZmVyZW50IElQdjQgc3VibmV0cy4mcXVvdDs8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+ DQo8ZGl2PiZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7SSBiZWxpZXZlIGl0IGlzIHRoZSBJUHY0IChpLmUu IGxheWVyLTMpIGFkZHJlc3MgdG8gYmUgcmVzb2x2ZWQgd2l0aCBBUlAgLSBub3QgdGhlJm5ic3A7 PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2PiZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7bGF5ZXItMiBhZGRyZXNzLiAmbmJzcDs8 L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvYmxvY2txdW90ZT4NCjwvc3Bhbj4NCjxk aXY+PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pk9rIC0gdGhpcyB0ZXh0IGNvbWVzIGZyb20gbWUgYW5kIEkg d2FzIHZpZXdpbmcgcmVzb2x1dGlvbiBmcm9tIHRoZSBzdGFuZHBvaW50IG9mIHRoZSDigJx0b+KA nSBhZGRyZXNzIGZhbWlseSByYXRoZXIgdGhhbiB0aGUg4oCcZnJvbeKAnSBhZGRyZXNzIGZhbWls eS4gSSBhZ3JlZSB0aGUg4oCcZnJvbeKAnSBhZGRyZXNzIGZhbWlseSBpcyBwcm9iYWJseSBhIG1v cmUgY29tbW9uIGNoYXJhY3Rlcml6YXRpb24uJm5ic3A7PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pjxicj4NCjwvZGl2 Pg0KPGRpdj48YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxzcGFuIGlkPSJPTEtfU1JDX0JPRFlfU0VDVElPTiI+DQo8 YmxvY2txdW90ZSBpZD0iTUFDX09VVExPT0tfQVRUUklCVVRJT05fQkxPQ0tRVU9URSIgc3R5bGU9 IkJPUkRFUi1MRUZUOiAjYjVjNGRmIDUgc29saWQ7IFBBRERJTkc6MCAwIDAgNTsgTUFSR0lOOjAg MCAwIDU7Ij4NCjxkaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBkaXI9Imx0ciI+DQo8ZGl2Pjxicj4NCjwvZGl2 Pg0KPGRpdj4yKSBTZWMgMy4zOiZuYnNwOyZxdW90O0lmIElQdjQgdHJhbnNwb3J0LCBhcyBzcGVj aWZpZWQmbmJzcDtoZXJlaW4sIGlzIHVzZWQgZm9yIElQdjYgYWRkcmVzcyZuYnNwOzwvZGl2Pg0K PGRpdj4mbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwO2ZhbWlsaWVzLCB2aXJ0dWFsIGxpbmtzIGNhbm5vdCBi ZTxicj4NCiZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7c3VwcG9ydGVkLiBIZW5jZSwgaXQgaXMgUkVDT01N RU5ERUQgdG8gdXNlIHRoZSBJUCB0cmFuc3BvcnQ8YnI+DQombmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwO21h dGNoaW5nIHRoZSBhZGRyZXNzIGZhbWlseSBpbiBPU1BGIHJvdXRpbmcgZG9tYWlucyByZXF1aXJp bmc8YnI+DQombmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwO3ZpcnR1YWwgbGlua3MuJnF1b3Q7PC9kaXY+DQo8 ZGl2Pjxicj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4mbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwO0Zyb20gdGhpcyBzZWN0 aW9uLCBJIHdhcyBleHBlY3RpbmcgdGhhdCAmcXVvdDtjYW5ub3QmcXVvdDsgd291bGQgYmUgYSAm cXVvdDtjYW4mcXVvdDsuJm5ic3A7IERpZDwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4mbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNw O0kgbWlzcyBzb21ldGhpbmc/Jm5ic3A7IENhbiB5b3UgY2xhcmlmeSBmdXJ0aGVyPzwvZGl2Pg0K PC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9ibG9ja3F1b3RlPg0KPC9zcGFuPg0KPGRpdj48YnI+ DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+VGhlIGRyYWZ0IGRvZXNu4oCZdCBhZGRyZXNzIHZpcnR1YWwgbGluayBz dXBwb3J0IGluIGRlcGxveW1lbnRzIHdoZXJlIHRoZSBhZGRyZXNzLWZhbWlseSBkb2VzbuKAmXQg bWF0Y2ggdGhlIHRyYW5zcG9ydC4gSGVuY2UsIHRoZSB0ZXh0IGlzIGNvcnJlY3QgYXMgd3JpdHRl bi4mbmJzcDs8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pjxicj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPHNw YW4gaWQ9Ik9MS19TUkNfQk9EWV9TRUNUSU9OIj4NCjxibG9ja3F1b3RlIGlkPSJNQUNfT1VUTE9P S19BVFRSSUJVVElPTl9CTE9DS1FVT1RFIiBzdHlsZT0iQk9SREVSLUxFRlQ6ICNiNWM0ZGYgNSBz b2xpZDsgUEFERElORzowIDAgMCA1OyBNQVJHSU46MCAwIDAgNTsiPg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8 ZGl2IGRpcj0ibHRyIj4NCjxkaXY+PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2PjMpIFNlYyAxOiAybmQgdG8g bGFzdCBwYXJhZ3JhcGg6Jm5ic3A7JnF1b3Q7SW4gc2l0dWF0aW9ucyB3aGVyZSB0aGUgSVB2NiBk ZXBsb3ltZW50IGlzIGE8YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+Jm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwO3Byb3BlciBzdXBl cnNldCBvZiB0aGUgSVB2NCBkZXBsb3ltZW50LCBpdCBpcyBleHBlY3RlZCB0aGF0IE9TUEZ2Mzxi cj4NCiZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDt3b3VsZCBiZSB0cmFuc3BvcnRlZCBvdmVyIElQdjYuJnF1b3Q7ICZu YnNwOyZuYnNwOzxicj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj48YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+Jm5ic3A7ICZu YnNwO0kgYmVsaWV2ZSB0aGUgJnF1b3Q7cHJvcGVyJnF1b3Q7IHNob3VsZCBiZSByZW1vdmVkLiAm bmJzcDsgSWYgdGhlIElQdjYgZGVwbG95bWVudCBpcyBleGFjdGx5IHRoZSBzYW1lPC9kaXY+DQo8 ZGl2PiZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDthcyB0aGUgSVB2NCBkZXBsb3ltZW50LCB0aGVuIGl0IGlzIGV4cGVj dGVkIHRoYXQgT1NQRnYzIHdvdWxkIGJlIHRyYW5zcG9ydGVkIG92ZXI8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+Jm5i c3A7ICZuYnNwO0lQdjYuICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgQXMgaXQgaXMsaG93IHRoZSBjYXNlIG9mIGVx dWFsIGRlcGxveW1lbnQgaXMgaGFuZGxlZCBpcyB1bnNwZWNpZmllZC48L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0K PC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvYmxvY2txdW90ZT4NCjwvc3Bhbj4NCjxkaXY+PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+ DQo8ZGl2PkkgYWdyZWUuIFdlIHdpbGwgcmVtb3ZlIOKAnHByb3BlciZxdW90Oy4mbmJzcDs8L2Rp dj4NCjxkaXY+PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2PlRoYW5rcyw8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+QWNlZSZuYnNw OzwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj48YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8c3BhbiBpZD0i T0xLX1NSQ19CT0RZX1NFQ1RJT04iPg0KPGJsb2NrcXVvdGUgaWQ9Ik1BQ19PVVRMT09LX0FUVFJJ QlVUSU9OX0JMT0NLUVVPVEUiIHN0eWxlPSJCT1JERVItTEVGVDogI2I1YzRkZiA1IHNvbGlkOyBQ QURESU5HOjAgMCAwIDU7IE1BUkdJTjowIDAgMCA1OyI+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXYgZGly PSJsdHIiPg0KPGRpdj48YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+VGhhbmtzLDwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj5BbGlh PC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Jsb2NrcXVvdGU+DQo8L3NwYW4+DQo8 L2JvZHk+DQo8L2h0bWw+DQo= --_000_D37F677263F09aceeciscocom_-- From nobody Thu Jun 9 15:59:33 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8700412B02C for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2016 15:59:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hlxoRPZJj8yT for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2016 15:59:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qg0-x230.google.com (mail-qg0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c04::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 33DEE12D5FC for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2016 15:59:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qg0-x230.google.com with SMTP id q32so28400940qgq.3 for ; Thu, 09 Jun 2016 15:59:24 -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; bh=xDFjc4lAaZerGWW3yOmMByVvcAA1wOZLUQzP+dwgt04=; b=q2ZdxMie5A/ERsEYI4yzd/MIt2CUYDTwkifGsSBHXsObtVaiCMFZhkHfLW39iAdn0G S1gz7rypsBufavuHb7xtG4kGrDYSBnBDF8svg064g9FLELd8uDvf5s8swvn1QIyUlito 9vKFhbd27tLZdQx60I5SvECpePtKg+5kcPfMM2H9kacbqRjUH4aPF269N52G44D/12cs zLQEjF12D7Ogiv8p8gIBip/n65Qhx5aMtqQEv2bMQu+IJXNr2ZJHP8CjPgmrSjtaI1i1 t66yYQaamO+2QnfWau/JZpKyU5YqBVqf8f5PliNha472iahHXeImIaEAFZdSbk1q3Kod siMQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=xDFjc4lAaZerGWW3yOmMByVvcAA1wOZLUQzP+dwgt04=; b=L0xCSji2mmI1mVvNzqiAEGpGlvlQOSTeqUgGW/Oc6mLHB+T9dr3hOUFcuaCt2Mixfn wd1IZUi0oDXTXqgNsl+FIghRsrZQoM1B8Ijf1+LNj3YUrnE625jRNUiI7Qtgusi2tX8+ 5jAk4eSJCI7Xw7ABfbC34wgCCOJ7ejhKm+y6xcBmrLeC2S7lsposthwHN+hCHhmt0oDV Wn/U4qT2sEq+WZfzTBqsWUNQx6xYJAdZPUGYupwbS53C+GoUiPPZ44aauAQWix5EkMnN 4/E1N1Gs8u8T2AtyNmkggDGQ1CylwhlHZ+F2L/2+qFrv594mq56JTd1C8gnzv4OqHQyK QXTw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tK7HfAWOTX0cMEyn89wamn6LtMp51Hn1+tWQ9g0Bw1tLd1SO5BplzaNWTynlJ54Jj4PU1vqhShH6Yp83w== X-Received: by 10.140.175.135 with SMTP id v129mr10776670qhv.5.1465513163382; Thu, 09 Jun 2016 15:59:23 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.200.57.81 with HTTP; Thu, 9 Jun 2016 15:59:22 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Alia Atlas Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 18:59:22 -0400 Message-ID: To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113a64e08464c80534e05f90 Archived-At: Cc: OSPF List Subject: Re: [OSPF] AD review of draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3-07 X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2016 22:59:30 -0000 --001a113a64e08464c80534e05f90 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Acee, On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 6:42 PM, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: > Hi Alia, > > Thanks for the review - you caught some rather subtle points. > thanks - this was a nice tractable draft to read in a short time. > From: OSPF on behalf of Alia Atlas < > akatlas@gmail.com> > Date: Thursday, June 9, 2016 at 3:57 PM > To: OSPF WG List > Subject: [OSPF] AD review of draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3-07 > > As is customary, I have done my AD review > of draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3-07. > First, I would like to thank the authors for their work on this document. > It looks like > very useful technology. > > I have a few minor questions below. I will put this into IETF Last Call > as well while > waiting for the authors to update the draft ASAP. That gives a chance o= f > making it > on to the June 30 telechat if the authors are responsive. > > Minor: > > 1) Sec 3.1: "If this is supported, the IPv4 data plane MUST resolve > the layer-2 address using Address Resolution Protocol (ARP) on > multi-access networks and point-to-point over LAN [RFC5309] for > direct next-hops on different IPv4 subnets." > > I believe it is the IPv4 (i.e. layer-3) address to be resolved with > ARP - not the > layer-2 address. > > > Ok - this text comes from me and I was viewing resolution from the > standpoint of the =E2=80=9Cto=E2=80=9D address family rather than the =E2= =80=9Cfrom=E2=80=9D address > family. I agree the =E2=80=9Cfrom=E2=80=9D address family is probably a m= ore common > characterization. > Feel free to say "MUST resolve from the IPv4 address to the layer-2 address using ARP...." if you want extreme clearness. > > > 2) Sec 3.3: "If IPv4 transport, as specified herein, is used for IPv6 > address > families, virtual links cannot be > supported. Hence, it is RECOMMENDED to use the IP transport > matching the address family in OSPF routing domains requiring > virtual links." > > From this section, I was expecting that "cannot" would be a "can". > Did > I miss something? Can you clarify further? > > > The draft doesn=E2=80=99t address virtual link support in deployments whe= re the > address-family doesn=E2=80=99t match the transport. Hence, the text is co= rrect as > written. > Ok - but the draft just says "Hence, it is RECOMMENDED to use the IP transport matching the address family in OSPF routing domains requiring virtual links." Can you clean this up to be extremely clear? With an IPv4 transport, IPv6 virtual links are not supported. With an IPv4 transport, IPv4 virtual links are supported. and vice versa. I read the relaxation as applying to both IPv4 and IPv6; maybe I was reading too fast, but a few clarifying words would probably help. 3) Sec 1: 2nd to last paragraph: "In situations where the IPv6 deployment > is a > proper superset of the IPv4 deployment, it is expected that OSPFv3 > would be transported over IPv6." > > I believe the "proper" should be removed. If the IPv6 deployment is > exactly the same > as the IPv4 deployment, then it is expected that OSPFv3 would be > transported over > IPv6. As it is,how the case of equal deployment is handled is > unspecified. > > > I agree. We will remove =E2=80=9Cproper". > thanks, Alia > > > Thanks, > Acee > > > > Thanks, > Alia > > --001a113a64e08464c80534e05f90 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Acee,

On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 6:42 PM, Acee Lindem (acee) <acee@cisco.com> wrote:
Hi Alia,=C2=A0

Thanks for the review - you caught some rather subtle points.=C2=A0

thanks - this was a nice tractabl= e draft to read in a short time.=C2=A0

=C2=A0
From: OSPF <ospf-bounces@ietf.org> on beh= alf of Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>
Date: Thursday, June 9, 2016 at 3:5= 7 PM
To: OSPF WG List <ospf@ietf.org>
Subject: [OSPF] AD review of draft-= ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3-07

As is customary, I have done my AD review of=C2=A0draft-ietf-ospf-tran= sition-to-ospfv3-07.
First, I would like to thank the authors for their work on this docume= nt.=C2=A0 It looks like
very useful technology.

I have a few minor questions below.=C2=A0 I will put this into IETF La= st Call as well while
waiting for the authors to update the draft ASAP. =C2=A0 That gives a = chance of making it
on to the June 30 telechat if the authors are responsive.

Minor:

1) Sec 3.1: =C2=A0"If this is supported, the IPv4 data plane MUST= resolve
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0the layer-2 address using Address Resolution Protocol (= ARP) on
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0multi-access networks and point-to-point over LAN [RFC5= 309] for
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0direct next-hops on different IPv4 subnets."

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0I believe it is the IPv4 (i.e. layer-3) address to= be resolved with ARP - not the=C2=A0
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0layer-2 address. =C2=A0

Ok - this text comes from me and I was viewing resolution from the sta= ndpoint of the =E2=80=9Cto=E2=80=9D address family rather than the =E2=80= =9Cfrom=E2=80=9D address family. I agree the =E2=80=9Cfrom=E2=80=9D address= family is probably a more common characterization.=C2=A0

Feel free to say "MUST resolve from the IPv= 4 address to the layer-2 address using ARP...." if you
want = extreme clearness.=C2=A0

=C2=A0


2) Sec 3.3:=C2=A0"If IPv4 transport, as specified=C2=A0herein, is= used for IPv6 address=C2=A0
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0families, virtual links cannot be
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0supported. Hence, it is RECOMMENDED to use the IP trans= port
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0matching the address family in OSPF routing domains req= uiring
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0virtual links."

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0From this section, I was expecting that "cann= ot" would be a "can".=C2=A0 Did
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0I miss something?=C2=A0 Can you clarify further?

The draft doesn=E2=80=99t address virtual link support in deplo= yments where the address-family doesn=E2=80=99t match the transport. Hence,= the text is correct as written.=C2=A0

Ok - but the draft =C2=A0just says=C2=A0
"Hence, it = is RECOMMENDED to use the IP transport
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0matching the = address family in OSPF routing domains requiring
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0vir= tual links."

Can you clean this up to be extr= emely clear?
With an IPv4 transport, IPv6 virtual links are not s= upported.
With an IPv4 transport, IPv4 virtual links are supporte= d.

and vice versa.

I read= the relaxation as applying to both IPv4 and IPv6; maybe I was reading too = fast, but a few clarifying
words would probably help.
<= br>
3) Sec 1: 2nd to last paragraph= :=C2=A0"In situations where the IPv6 deployment is a
=C2=A0 =C2=A0proper superset of the IPv4 deployment, it is expected th= at OSPFv3
=C2=A0 =C2=A0would be transported over IPv6." =C2=A0=C2=A0

=C2=A0 =C2=A0I believe the "proper" should be removed. =C2= =A0 If the IPv6 deployment is exactly the same
=C2=A0 =C2=A0as the IPv4 deployment, then it is expected that OSPFv3 w= ould be transported over
=C2=A0 =C2=A0IPv6. =C2=A0 =C2=A0 As it is,how the case of equal deploy= ment is handled is unspecified.

I agree. We will remove =E2=80=9Cproper".=C2=A0

thanks,
Alia=C2=A0
=C2=A0
=C2=A0
Thanks,
Acee=C2=A0



Thanks,
Alia

--001a113a64e08464c80534e05f90-- From nobody Thu Jun 9 16:01:53 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FE6C12D5CB for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2016 16:01:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -15.946 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.946 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id b7E-oNPpT9SM for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2016 16:01:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.86.77]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DA15812D5A0 for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2016 16:01:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=18711; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1465513309; x=1466722909; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=X6Z9Xu8sq00TP/RihpRtD/dO2/CZRj1fSZ9aMHCHkcw=; b=IcRHQYh00oqOM8pTOyKEBrXa7dgVgX5MOx3c+BtH85mj7bXQ7i8tC7E3 ye/qszDvDdtqdcxYdbw5YECrK754R0KGTypzNO9owIPBMhu43lBvwLYgy A0KItBHxIMaOgPDwByktTHsgA8591SlFyZpmdH13k8bILPXYHWmI/l/pC c=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0BBAgBI9FlX/5tdJa1egnBOgVMGrxWHA?= =?us-ascii?q?IJwgg+BeoYTAhyBHjgUAQEBAQEBAWUnhEUBAQEEI1YQAgEIDgMDAQIoAwICAh8?= =?us-ascii?q?RFAkIAgQOBYgVAxetaIxtDYN7AQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEdinSCQ4Idg?= =?us-ascii?q?mGCWQWTPIRlNAGMLIF6gWmHfoU5hkCBOYdrAR42ggccgUtuiQl/AQEB?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.26,447,1459814400"; d="scan'208,217";a="113496106" Received: from rcdn-core-4.cisco.com ([173.37.93.155]) by rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Jun 2016 23:01:48 +0000 Received: from XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com (xch-rtp-015.cisco.com [64.101.220.155]) by rcdn-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u59N1m2c025993 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 9 Jun 2016 23:01:48 GMT Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Thu, 9 Jun 2016 19:01:47 -0400 Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Thu, 9 Jun 2016 19:01:47 -0400 From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" To: Alia Atlas Thread-Topic: [OSPF] AD review of draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3-07 Thread-Index: AQHRwok+uUYZzsz18kaAeu9BATV60Z/hu1EAgABHyQD//72bAA== Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 23:01:47 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.116.152.196] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_D37F6D6363F25aceeciscocom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: OSPF List Subject: Re: [OSPF] AD review of draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3-07 X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2016 23:01:52 -0000 --_000_D37F6D6363F25aceeciscocom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 SGkgQWxpYSwNCkkgYWdyZWUgd2l0aCB5b3VyIHN1Z2dlc3Rpb25zIC0gd2Ugd2lsbCBtYWtlIHVw ZGF0ZSB0aGUgZHJhZnQgYmVmb3JlIHRoZSB0ZWxlIGNoYXQuDQpUaGFua3MsDQpBY2VlDQoNCkZy b206IEFsaWEgQXRsYXMgPGFrYXRsYXNAZ21haWwuY29tPG1haWx0bzpha2F0bGFzQGdtYWlsLmNv bT4+DQpEYXRlOiBUaHVyc2RheSwgSnVuZSA5LCAyMDE2IGF0IDY6NTkgUE0NClRvOiBBY2VlIExp bmRlbSA8YWNlZUBjaXNjby5jb208bWFpbHRvOmFjZWVAY2lzY28uY29tPj4NCkNjOiBPU1BGIFdH IExpc3QgPG9zcGZAaWV0Zi5vcmc8bWFpbHRvOm9zcGZAaWV0Zi5vcmc+Pg0KU3ViamVjdDogUmU6 IFtPU1BGXSBBRCByZXZpZXcgb2YgZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1vc3BmLXRyYW5zaXRpb24tdG8tb3NwZnYz LTA3DQoNCkhpIEFjZWUsDQoNCk9uIFRodSwgSnVuIDksIDIwMTYgYXQgNjo0MiBQTSwgQWNlZSBM aW5kZW0gKGFjZWUpIDxhY2VlQGNpc2NvLmNvbTxtYWlsdG86YWNlZUBjaXNjby5jb20+PiB3cm90 ZToNCkhpIEFsaWEsDQoNClRoYW5rcyBmb3IgdGhlIHJldmlldyAtIHlvdSBjYXVnaHQgc29tZSBy YXRoZXIgc3VidGxlIHBvaW50cy4NCg0KdGhhbmtzIC0gdGhpcyB3YXMgYSBuaWNlIHRyYWN0YWJs ZSBkcmFmdCB0byByZWFkIGluIGEgc2hvcnQgdGltZS4NCg0KDQpGcm9tOiBPU1BGIDxvc3BmLWJv dW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmc8bWFpbHRvOm9zcGYtYm91bmNlc0BpZXRmLm9yZz4+IG9uIGJlaGFsZiBv ZiBBbGlhIEF0bGFzIDxha2F0bGFzQGdtYWlsLmNvbTxtYWlsdG86YWthdGxhc0BnbWFpbC5jb20+ Pg0KRGF0ZTogVGh1cnNkYXksIEp1bmUgOSwgMjAxNiBhdCAzOjU3IFBNDQpUbzogT1NQRiBXRyBM aXN0IDxvc3BmQGlldGYub3JnPG1haWx0bzpvc3BmQGlldGYub3JnPj4NClN1YmplY3Q6IFtPU1BG XSBBRCByZXZpZXcgb2YgZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1vc3BmLXRyYW5zaXRpb24tdG8tb3NwZnYzLTA3DQoN CkFzIGlzIGN1c3RvbWFyeSwgSSBoYXZlIGRvbmUgbXkgQUQgcmV2aWV3IG9mIGRyYWZ0LWlldGYt b3NwZi10cmFuc2l0aW9uLXRvLW9zcGZ2My0wNy4NCkZpcnN0LCBJIHdvdWxkIGxpa2UgdG8gdGhh bmsgdGhlIGF1dGhvcnMgZm9yIHRoZWlyIHdvcmsgb24gdGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudC4gIEl0IGxvb2tz IGxpa2UNCnZlcnkgdXNlZnVsIHRlY2hub2xvZ3kuDQoNCkkgaGF2ZSBhIGZldyBtaW5vciBxdWVz dGlvbnMgYmVsb3cuICBJIHdpbGwgcHV0IHRoaXMgaW50byBJRVRGIExhc3QgQ2FsbCBhcyB3ZWxs IHdoaWxlDQp3YWl0aW5nIGZvciB0aGUgYXV0aG9ycyB0byB1cGRhdGUgdGhlIGRyYWZ0IEFTQVAu ICAgVGhhdCBnaXZlcyBhIGNoYW5jZSBvZiBtYWtpbmcgaXQNCm9uIHRvIHRoZSBKdW5lIDMwIHRl bGVjaGF0IGlmIHRoZSBhdXRob3JzIGFyZSByZXNwb25zaXZlLg0KDQpNaW5vcjoNCg0KMSkgU2Vj IDMuMTogICJJZiB0aGlzIGlzIHN1cHBvcnRlZCwgdGhlIElQdjQgZGF0YSBwbGFuZSBNVVNUIHJl c29sdmUNCiAgICAgdGhlIGxheWVyLTIgYWRkcmVzcyB1c2luZyBBZGRyZXNzIFJlc29sdXRpb24g UHJvdG9jb2wgKEFSUCkgb24NCiAgICAgbXVsdGktYWNjZXNzIG5ldHdvcmtzIGFuZCBwb2ludC10 by1wb2ludCBvdmVyIExBTiBbUkZDNTMwOV0gZm9yDQogICAgIGRpcmVjdCBuZXh0LWhvcHMgb24g ZGlmZmVyZW50IElQdjQgc3VibmV0cy4iDQoNCiAgICAgSSBiZWxpZXZlIGl0IGlzIHRoZSBJUHY0 IChpLmUuIGxheWVyLTMpIGFkZHJlc3MgdG8gYmUgcmVzb2x2ZWQgd2l0aCBBUlAgLSBub3QgdGhl DQogICAgIGxheWVyLTIgYWRkcmVzcy4NCg0KT2sgLSB0aGlzIHRleHQgY29tZXMgZnJvbSBtZSBh bmQgSSB3YXMgdmlld2luZyByZXNvbHV0aW9uIGZyb20gdGhlIHN0YW5kcG9pbnQgb2YgdGhlIOKA nHRv4oCdIGFkZHJlc3MgZmFtaWx5IHJhdGhlciB0aGFuIHRoZSDigJxmcm9t4oCdIGFkZHJlc3Mg ZmFtaWx5LiBJIGFncmVlIHRoZSDigJxmcm9t4oCdIGFkZHJlc3MgZmFtaWx5IGlzIHByb2JhYmx5 IGEgbW9yZSBjb21tb24gY2hhcmFjdGVyaXphdGlvbi4NCg0KRmVlbCBmcmVlIHRvIHNheSAiTVVT VCByZXNvbHZlIGZyb20gdGhlIElQdjQgYWRkcmVzcyB0byB0aGUgbGF5ZXItMiBhZGRyZXNzIHVz aW5nIEFSUC4uLi4iIGlmIHlvdQ0Kd2FudCBleHRyZW1lIGNsZWFybmVzcy4NCg0KDQoNCg0KMikg U2VjIDMuMzogIklmIElQdjQgdHJhbnNwb3J0LCBhcyBzcGVjaWZpZWQgaGVyZWluLCBpcyB1c2Vk IGZvciBJUHY2IGFkZHJlc3MNCiAgICAgZmFtaWxpZXMsIHZpcnR1YWwgbGlua3MgY2Fubm90IGJl DQogICAgIHN1cHBvcnRlZC4gSGVuY2UsIGl0IGlzIFJFQ09NTUVOREVEIHRvIHVzZSB0aGUgSVAg dHJhbnNwb3J0DQogICAgIG1hdGNoaW5nIHRoZSBhZGRyZXNzIGZhbWlseSBpbiBPU1BGIHJvdXRp bmcgZG9tYWlucyByZXF1aXJpbmcNCiAgICAgdmlydHVhbCBsaW5rcy4iDQoNCiAgICAgRnJvbSB0 aGlzIHNlY3Rpb24sIEkgd2FzIGV4cGVjdGluZyB0aGF0ICJjYW5ub3QiIHdvdWxkIGJlIGEgImNh biIuICBEaWQNCiAgICAgSSBtaXNzIHNvbWV0aGluZz8gIENhbiB5b3UgY2xhcmlmeSBmdXJ0aGVy Pw0KDQpUaGUgZHJhZnQgZG9lc27igJl0IGFkZHJlc3MgdmlydHVhbCBsaW5rIHN1cHBvcnQgaW4g ZGVwbG95bWVudHMgd2hlcmUgdGhlIGFkZHJlc3MtZmFtaWx5IGRvZXNu4oCZdCBtYXRjaCB0aGUg dHJhbnNwb3J0LiBIZW5jZSwgdGhlIHRleHQgaXMgY29ycmVjdCBhcyB3cml0dGVuLg0KDQpPayAt IGJ1dCB0aGUgZHJhZnQgIGp1c3Qgc2F5cw0KIkhlbmNlLCBpdCBpcyBSRUNPTU1FTkRFRCB0byB1 c2UgdGhlIElQIHRyYW5zcG9ydA0KICAgICBtYXRjaGluZyB0aGUgYWRkcmVzcyBmYW1pbHkgaW4g T1NQRiByb3V0aW5nIGRvbWFpbnMgcmVxdWlyaW5nDQogICAgIHZpcnR1YWwgbGlua3MuIg0KDQpD YW4geW91IGNsZWFuIHRoaXMgdXAgdG8gYmUgZXh0cmVtZWx5IGNsZWFyPw0KV2l0aCBhbiBJUHY0 IHRyYW5zcG9ydCwgSVB2NiB2aXJ0dWFsIGxpbmtzIGFyZSBub3Qgc3VwcG9ydGVkLg0KV2l0aCBh biBJUHY0IHRyYW5zcG9ydCwgSVB2NCB2aXJ0dWFsIGxpbmtzIGFyZSBzdXBwb3J0ZWQuDQoNCmFu ZCB2aWNlIHZlcnNhLg0KDQpJIHJlYWQgdGhlIHJlbGF4YXRpb24gYXMgYXBwbHlpbmcgdG8gYm90 aCBJUHY0IGFuZCBJUHY2OyBtYXliZSBJIHdhcyByZWFkaW5nIHRvbyBmYXN0LCBidXQgYSBmZXcg Y2xhcmlmeWluZw0Kd29yZHMgd291bGQgcHJvYmFibHkgaGVscC4NCg0KMykgU2VjIDE6IDJuZCB0 byBsYXN0IHBhcmFncmFwaDogIkluIHNpdHVhdGlvbnMgd2hlcmUgdGhlIElQdjYgZGVwbG95bWVu dCBpcyBhDQogICBwcm9wZXIgc3VwZXJzZXQgb2YgdGhlIElQdjQgZGVwbG95bWVudCwgaXQgaXMg ZXhwZWN0ZWQgdGhhdCBPU1BGdjMNCiAgIHdvdWxkIGJlIHRyYW5zcG9ydGVkIG92ZXIgSVB2Ni4i DQoNCiAgIEkgYmVsaWV2ZSB0aGUgInByb3BlciIgc2hvdWxkIGJlIHJlbW92ZWQuICAgSWYgdGhl IElQdjYgZGVwbG95bWVudCBpcyBleGFjdGx5IHRoZSBzYW1lDQogICBhcyB0aGUgSVB2NCBkZXBs b3ltZW50LCB0aGVuIGl0IGlzIGV4cGVjdGVkIHRoYXQgT1NQRnYzIHdvdWxkIGJlIHRyYW5zcG9y dGVkIG92ZXINCiAgIElQdjYuICAgICBBcyBpdCBpcyxob3cgdGhlIGNhc2Ugb2YgZXF1YWwgZGVw bG95bWVudCBpcyBoYW5kbGVkIGlzIHVuc3BlY2lmaWVkLg0KDQpJIGFncmVlLiBXZSB3aWxsIHJl bW92ZSDigJxwcm9wZXIiLg0KDQp0aGFua3MsDQpBbGlhDQoNCg0KVGhhbmtzLA0KQWNlZQ0KDQoN Cg0KVGhhbmtzLA0KQWxpYQ0KDQo= --_000_D37F6D6363F25aceeciscocom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <1E00CEF6DDCE2B4EB51E14B1794DC6E7@emea.cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWw+DQo8aGVhZD4NCjxtZXRhIGh0dHAtZXF1aXY9IkNvbnRlbnQtVHlwZSIgY29udGVudD0i dGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PXV0Zi04Ij4NCjwvaGVhZD4NCjxib2R5IHN0eWxlPSJ3b3JkLXdy YXA6IGJyZWFrLXdvcmQ7IC13ZWJraXQtbmJzcC1tb2RlOiBzcGFjZTsgLXdlYmtpdC1saW5lLWJy ZWFrOiBhZnRlci13aGl0ZS1zcGFjZTsgY29sb3I6IHJnYigwLCAwLCAwKTsgZm9udC1zaXplOiAx NHB4OyBmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ2FsaWJyaSwgc2Fucy1zZXJpZjsiPg0KPGRpdj5IaSBBbGlhLCZu YnNwOzwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj5JIGFncmVlIHdpdGggeW91ciBzdWdnZXN0aW9ucyAtIHdlIHdpbGwg bWFrZSB1cGRhdGUgdGhlIGRyYWZ0IGJlZm9yZSB0aGUgdGVsZSBjaGF0LiZuYnNwOzwvZGl2Pg0K PGRpdj5UaGFua3MsPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2PkFjZWUmbmJzcDs8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+PGJyPg0KPC9k aXY+DQo8c3BhbiBpZD0iT0xLX1NSQ19CT0RZX1NFQ1RJT04iPg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1m YW1pbHk6Q2FsaWJyaTsgZm9udC1zaXplOjExcHQ7IHRleHQtYWxpZ246bGVmdDsgY29sb3I6Ymxh Y2s7IEJPUkRFUi1CT1RUT006IG1lZGl1bSBub25lOyBCT1JERVItTEVGVDogbWVkaXVtIG5vbmU7 IFBBRERJTkctQk9UVE9NOiAwaW47IFBBRERJTkctTEVGVDogMGluOyBQQURESU5HLVJJR0hUOiAw aW47IEJPUkRFUi1UT1A6ICNiNWM0ZGYgMXB0IHNvbGlkOyBCT1JERVItUklHSFQ6IG1lZGl1bSBu b25lOyBQQURESU5HLVRPUDogM3B0Ij4NCjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXdlaWdodDpib2xkIj5G cm9tOiA8L3NwYW4+QWxpYSBBdGxhcyAmbHQ7PGEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOmFrYXRsYXNAZ21haWwu Y29tIj5ha2F0bGFzQGdtYWlsLmNvbTwvYT4mZ3Q7PGJyPg0KPHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtd2Vp Z2h0OmJvbGQiPkRhdGU6IDwvc3Bhbj5UaHVyc2RheSwgSnVuZSA5LCAyMDE2IGF0IDY6NTkgUE08 YnI+DQo8c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC13ZWlnaHQ6Ym9sZCI+VG86IDwvc3Bhbj5BY2VlIExpbmRl bSAmbHQ7PGEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOmFjZWVAY2lzY28uY29tIj5hY2VlQGNpc2NvLmNvbTwvYT4m Z3Q7PGJyPg0KPHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtd2VpZ2h0OmJvbGQiPkNjOiA8L3NwYW4+T1NQRiBX RyBMaXN0ICZsdDs8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86b3NwZkBpZXRmLm9yZyI+b3NwZkBpZXRmLm9yZzwv YT4mZ3Q7PGJyPg0KPHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtd2VpZ2h0OmJvbGQiPlN1YmplY3Q6IDwvc3Bh bj5SZTogW09TUEZdIEFEIHJldmlldyBvZiBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLW9zcGYtdHJhbnNpdGlvbi10by1v c3BmdjMtMDc8YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8YmxvY2txdW90ZSBpZD0i TUFDX09VVExPT0tfQVRUUklCVVRJT05fQkxPQ0tRVU9URSIgc3R5bGU9IkJPUkRFUi1MRUZUOiAj YjVjNGRmIDUgc29saWQ7IFBBRERJTkc6MCAwIDAgNTsgTUFSR0lOOjAgMCAwIDU7Ij4NCjxkaXY+ DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBkaXI9Imx0ciI+SGkgQWNlZSwNCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9ImdtYWlsX2V4dHJh Ij48YnI+DQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSJnbWFpbF9xdW90ZSI+T24gVGh1LCBKdW4gOSwgMjAxNiBhdCA2 OjQyIFBNLCBBY2VlIExpbmRlbSAoYWNlZSkgPHNwYW4gZGlyPSJsdHIiPg0KJmx0OzxhIGhyZWY9 Im1haWx0bzphY2VlQGNpc2NvLmNvbSIgdGFyZ2V0PSJfYmxhbmsiPmFjZWVAY2lzY28uY29tPC9h PiZndDs8L3NwYW4+IHdyb3RlOjxicj4NCjxibG9ja3F1b3RlIGNsYXNzPSJnbWFpbF9xdW90ZSIg c3R5bGU9Im1hcmdpbjowcHggMHB4IDBweCAwLjhleDtib3JkZXItbGVmdC13aWR0aDoxcHg7Ym9y ZGVyLWxlZnQtc3R5bGU6c29saWQ7Ym9yZGVyLWxlZnQtY29sb3I6cmdiKDIwNCwyMDQsMjA0KTtw YWRkaW5nLWxlZnQ6MWV4Ij4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9IndvcmQtd3JhcDpicmVhay13b3JkO2NvbG9y OnJnYigwLDAsMCk7Zm9udC1zaXplOjE0cHg7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6Q2FsaWJyaSxzYW5zLXNlcmlm Ij4NCjxkaXY+SGkgQWxpYSwmbmJzcDs8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2PlRo YW5rcyBmb3IgdGhlIHJldmlldyAtIHlvdSBjYXVnaHQgc29tZSByYXRoZXIgc3VidGxlIHBvaW50 cy4mbmJzcDs8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9ibG9ja3F1b3RlPg0KPGRpdj48YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4N CjxkaXY+dGhhbmtzIC0gdGhpcyB3YXMgYSBuaWNlIHRyYWN0YWJsZSBkcmFmdCB0byByZWFkIGlu IGEgc2hvcnQgdGltZS4mbmJzcDs8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2PiZuYnNw OzwvZGl2Pg0KPGJsb2NrcXVvdGUgY2xhc3M9ImdtYWlsX3F1b3RlIiBzdHlsZT0ibWFyZ2luOjBw eCAwcHggMHB4IDAuOGV4O2JvcmRlci1sZWZ0LXdpZHRoOjFweDtib3JkZXItbGVmdC1zdHlsZTpz b2xpZDtib3JkZXItbGVmdC1jb2xvcjpyZ2IoMjA0LDIwNCwyMDQpO3BhZGRpbmctbGVmdDoxZXgi Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0id29yZC13cmFwOmJyZWFrLXdvcmQ7Y29sb3I6cmdiKDAsMCwwKTtmb250 LXNpemU6MTRweDtmb250LWZhbWlseTpDYWxpYnJpLHNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPg0KPGRpdj48L2Rpdj4N CjxzcGFuPg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6Q2FsaWJyaTtmb250LXNpemU6MTFwdDt0 ZXh0LWFsaWduOmxlZnQ7Y29sb3I6YmxhY2s7Ym9yZGVyLXdpZHRoOjFwdCBtZWRpdW0gbWVkaXVt O2JvcmRlci1zdHlsZTpzb2xpZCBub25lIG5vbmU7cGFkZGluZzozcHQgMGluIDBpbjtib3JkZXIt dG9wLWNvbG9yOnJnYigxODEsMTk2LDIyMykiPg0KPHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtd2VpZ2h0OmJv bGQiPkZyb206IDwvc3Bhbj5PU1BGICZsdDs8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86b3NwZi1ib3VuY2VzQGll dGYub3JnIiB0YXJnZXQ9Il9ibGFuayI+b3NwZi1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3JnPC9hPiZndDsgb24g YmVoYWxmIG9mIEFsaWEgQXRsYXMgJmx0OzxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpha2F0bGFzQGdtYWlsLmNv bSIgdGFyZ2V0PSJfYmxhbmsiPmFrYXRsYXNAZ21haWwuY29tPC9hPiZndDs8YnI+DQo8c3BhbiBz dHlsZT0iZm9udC13ZWlnaHQ6Ym9sZCI+RGF0ZTogPC9zcGFuPlRodXJzZGF5LCBKdW5lIDksIDIw MTYgYXQgMzo1NyBQTTxicj4NCjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXdlaWdodDpib2xkIj5UbzogPC9z cGFuPk9TUEYgV0cgTGlzdCAmbHQ7PGEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOm9zcGZAaWV0Zi5vcmciIHRhcmdl dD0iX2JsYW5rIj5vc3BmQGlldGYub3JnPC9hPiZndDs8YnI+DQo8c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC13 ZWlnaHQ6Ym9sZCI+U3ViamVjdDogPC9zcGFuPltPU1BGXSBBRCByZXZpZXcgb2YgZHJhZnQtaWV0 Zi1vc3BmLXRyYW5zaXRpb24tdG8tb3NwZnYzLTA3PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8c3Bhbj4NCjxkaXY+ PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8YmxvY2txdW90ZSBzdHlsZT0iQk9SREVSLUxFRlQ6I2I1YzRkZiA1IHNv bGlkO1BBRERJTkc6MCAwIDAgNTtNQVJHSU46MCAwIDAgNSI+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXYg ZGlyPSJsdHIiPg0KPGRpdj5BcyBpcyBjdXN0b21hcnksIEkgaGF2ZSBkb25lIG15IEFEIHJldmll dyBvZiZuYnNwO2RyYWZ0LWlldGYtb3NwZi10cmFuc2l0aW9uLXRvLW9zcGZ2My0wNy48YnI+DQo8 L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+Rmlyc3QsIEkgd291bGQgbGlrZSB0byB0aGFuayB0aGUgYXV0aG9ycyBmb3Ig dGhlaXIgd29yayBvbiB0aGlzIGRvY3VtZW50LiZuYnNwOyBJdCBsb29rcyBsaWtlPC9kaXY+DQo8 ZGl2PnZlcnkgdXNlZnVsIHRlY2hub2xvZ3kuPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pjxicj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRp dj5JIGhhdmUgYSBmZXcgbWlub3IgcXVlc3Rpb25zIGJlbG93LiZuYnNwOyBJIHdpbGwgcHV0IHRo aXMgaW50byBJRVRGIExhc3QgQ2FsbCBhcyB3ZWxsIHdoaWxlPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2PndhaXRpbmcg Zm9yIHRoZSBhdXRob3JzIHRvIHVwZGF0ZSB0aGUgZHJhZnQgQVNBUC4gJm5ic3A7IFRoYXQgZ2l2 ZXMgYSBjaGFuY2Ugb2YgbWFraW5nIGl0PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pm9uIHRvIHRoZSBKdW5lIDMwIHRl bGVjaGF0IGlmIHRoZSBhdXRob3JzIGFyZSByZXNwb25zaXZlLjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj48YnI+DQo8 L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+TWlub3I6PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pjxicj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4xKSBTZWMg My4xOiAmbmJzcDsmcXVvdDtJZiB0aGlzIGlzIHN1cHBvcnRlZCwgdGhlIElQdjQgZGF0YSBwbGFu ZSBNVVNUIHJlc29sdmU8YnI+DQombmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwO3RoZSBsYXllci0yIGFkZHJl c3MgdXNpbmcgQWRkcmVzcyBSZXNvbHV0aW9uIFByb3RvY29sIChBUlApIG9uPGJyPg0KJm5ic3A7 ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDttdWx0aS1hY2Nlc3MgbmV0d29ya3MgYW5kIHBvaW50LXRvLXBvaW50IG92 ZXIgTEFOIFtSRkM1MzA5XSBmb3I8YnI+DQombmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwO2RpcmVjdCBuZXh0 LWhvcHMgb24gZGlmZmVyZW50IElQdjQgc3VibmV0cy4mcXVvdDs8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+PGJyPg0K PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2PiZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7SSBiZWxpZXZlIGl0IGlzIHRoZSBJUHY0 IChpLmUuIGxheWVyLTMpIGFkZHJlc3MgdG8gYmUgcmVzb2x2ZWQgd2l0aCBBUlAgLSBub3QgdGhl Jm5ic3A7PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2PiZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7bGF5ZXItMiBhZGRyZXNzLiAm bmJzcDs8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvYmxvY2txdW90ZT4NCjwvc3Bh bj48L3NwYW4+DQo8ZGl2Pjxicj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj5PayAtIHRoaXMgdGV4dCBjb21lcyBm cm9tIG1lIGFuZCBJIHdhcyB2aWV3aW5nIHJlc29sdXRpb24gZnJvbSB0aGUgc3RhbmRwb2ludCBv ZiB0aGUg4oCcdG/igJ0gYWRkcmVzcyBmYW1pbHkgcmF0aGVyIHRoYW4gdGhlIOKAnGZyb23igJ0g YWRkcmVzcyBmYW1pbHkuIEkgYWdyZWUgdGhlIOKAnGZyb23igJ0gYWRkcmVzcyBmYW1pbHkgaXMg cHJvYmFibHkgYSBtb3JlIGNvbW1vbiBjaGFyYWN0ZXJpemF0aW9uLiZuYnNwOzwvZGl2Pg0KPC9k aXY+DQo8L2Jsb2NrcXVvdGU+DQo8ZGl2Pjxicj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj5GZWVsIGZyZWUgdG8g c2F5ICZxdW90O01VU1QgcmVzb2x2ZSBmcm9tIHRoZSBJUHY0IGFkZHJlc3MgdG8gdGhlIGxheWVy LTIgYWRkcmVzcyB1c2luZyBBUlAuLi4uJnF1b3Q7IGlmIHlvdTwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj53YW50IGV4 dHJlbWUgY2xlYXJuZXNzLiZuYnNwOzwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj48YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+Jm5i c3A7PC9kaXY+DQo8YmxvY2txdW90ZSBjbGFzcz0iZ21haWxfcXVvdGUiIHN0eWxlPSJtYXJnaW46 MHB4IDBweCAwcHggMC44ZXg7Ym9yZGVyLWxlZnQtd2lkdGg6MXB4O2JvcmRlci1sZWZ0LXN0eWxl OnNvbGlkO2JvcmRlci1sZWZ0LWNvbG9yOnJnYigyMDQsMjA0LDIwNCk7cGFkZGluZy1sZWZ0OjFl eCI+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJ3b3JkLXdyYXA6YnJlYWstd29yZDtjb2xvcjpyZ2IoMCwwLDApO2Zv bnQtc2l6ZToxNHB4O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OkNhbGlicmksc2Fucy1zZXJpZiI+DQo8c3Bhbj4NCjxk aXY+PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pjxicj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPHNwYW4+DQo8YmxvY2txdW90ZSBzdHlsZT0i Qk9SREVSLUxFRlQ6I2I1YzRkZiA1IHNvbGlkO1BBRERJTkc6MCAwIDAgNTtNQVJHSU46MCAwIDAg NSI+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXYgZGlyPSJsdHIiPg0KPGRpdj48YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxk aXY+MikgU2VjIDMuMzombmJzcDsmcXVvdDtJZiBJUHY0IHRyYW5zcG9ydCwgYXMgc3BlY2lmaWVk Jm5ic3A7aGVyZWluLCBpcyB1c2VkIGZvciBJUHY2IGFkZHJlc3MmbmJzcDs8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+ Jm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDtmYW1pbGllcywgdmlydHVhbCBsaW5rcyBjYW5ub3QgYmU8YnI+ DQombmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwO3N1cHBvcnRlZC4gSGVuY2UsIGl0IGlzIFJFQ09NTUVOREVE IHRvIHVzZSB0aGUgSVAgdHJhbnNwb3J0PGJyPg0KJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDttYXRjaGlu ZyB0aGUgYWRkcmVzcyBmYW1pbHkgaW4gT1NQRiByb3V0aW5nIGRvbWFpbnMgcmVxdWlyaW5nPGJy Pg0KJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDt2aXJ0dWFsIGxpbmtzLiZxdW90OzwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj48 YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+Jm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDtGcm9tIHRoaXMgc2VjdGlvbiwg SSB3YXMgZXhwZWN0aW5nIHRoYXQgJnF1b3Q7Y2Fubm90JnF1b3Q7IHdvdWxkIGJlIGEgJnF1b3Q7 Y2FuJnF1b3Q7LiZuYnNwOyBEaWQ8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+Jm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDtJIG1p c3Mgc29tZXRoaW5nPyZuYnNwOyBDYW4geW91IGNsYXJpZnkgZnVydGhlcj88L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2 Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvYmxvY2txdW90ZT4NCjwvc3Bhbj4NCjxkaXY+PGJyPg0KPC9k aXY+DQo8L3NwYW4+DQo8ZGl2PlRoZSBkcmFmdCBkb2VzbuKAmXQgYWRkcmVzcyB2aXJ0dWFsIGxp bmsgc3VwcG9ydCBpbiBkZXBsb3ltZW50cyB3aGVyZSB0aGUgYWRkcmVzcy1mYW1pbHkgZG9lc27i gJl0IG1hdGNoIHRoZSB0cmFuc3BvcnQuIEhlbmNlLCB0aGUgdGV4dCBpcyBjb3JyZWN0IGFzIHdy aXR0ZW4uJm5ic3A7PC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvYmxvY2txdW90ZT4NCjxkaXY+PGJyPg0KPC9k aXY+DQo8ZGl2Pk9rIC0gYnV0IHRoZSBkcmFmdCAmbmJzcDtqdXN0IHNheXMmbmJzcDs8L2Rpdj4N CjxkaXY+JnF1b3Q7SGVuY2UsIGl0IGlzIFJFQ09NTUVOREVEIHRvIHVzZSB0aGUgSVAgdHJhbnNw b3J0PGJyPg0KJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDttYXRjaGluZyB0aGUgYWRkcmVzcyBmYW1pbHkg aW4gT1NQRiByb3V0aW5nIGRvbWFpbnMgcmVxdWlyaW5nPGJyPg0KJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJz cDt2aXJ0dWFsIGxpbmtzLiZxdW90OzwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj48YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+Q2Fu IHlvdSBjbGVhbiB0aGlzIHVwIHRvIGJlIGV4dHJlbWVseSBjbGVhcj88L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+V2l0 aCBhbiBJUHY0IHRyYW5zcG9ydCwgSVB2NiB2aXJ0dWFsIGxpbmtzIGFyZSBub3Qgc3VwcG9ydGVk LjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj5XaXRoIGFuIElQdjQgdHJhbnNwb3J0LCBJUHY0IHZpcnR1YWwgbGlua3Mg YXJlIHN1cHBvcnRlZC48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2PmFuZCB2aWNlIHZl cnNhLjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj48YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+SSByZWFkIHRoZSByZWxheGF0aW9u IGFzIGFwcGx5aW5nIHRvIGJvdGggSVB2NCBhbmQgSVB2NjsgbWF5YmUgSSB3YXMgcmVhZGluZyB0 b28gZmFzdCwgYnV0IGEgZmV3IGNsYXJpZnlpbmc8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+d29yZHMgd291bGQgcHJv YmFibHkgaGVscC48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8YmxvY2txdW90ZSBjbGFzcz0i Z21haWxfcXVvdGUiIHN0eWxlPSJtYXJnaW46MHB4IDBweCAwcHggMC44ZXg7Ym9yZGVyLWxlZnQt d2lkdGg6MXB4O2JvcmRlci1sZWZ0LXN0eWxlOnNvbGlkO2JvcmRlci1sZWZ0LWNvbG9yOnJnYigy MDQsMjA0LDIwNCk7cGFkZGluZy1sZWZ0OjFleCI+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJ3b3JkLXdyYXA6YnJl YWstd29yZDtjb2xvcjpyZ2IoMCwwLDApO2ZvbnQtc2l6ZToxNHB4O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OkNhbGli cmksc2Fucy1zZXJpZiI+DQo8c3Bhbj4NCjxkaXY+PC9kaXY+DQo8c3Bhbj4NCjxibG9ja3F1b3Rl IHN0eWxlPSJCT1JERVItTEVGVDojYjVjNGRmIDUgc29saWQ7UEFERElORzowIDAgMCA1O01BUkdJ TjowIDAgMCA1Ij4NCjxkaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBkaXI9Imx0ciI+DQo8ZGl2PjMpIFNlYyAx OiAybmQgdG8gbGFzdCBwYXJhZ3JhcGg6Jm5ic3A7JnF1b3Q7SW4gc2l0dWF0aW9ucyB3aGVyZSB0 aGUgSVB2NiBkZXBsb3ltZW50IGlzIGE8YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+Jm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwO3By b3BlciBzdXBlcnNldCBvZiB0aGUgSVB2NCBkZXBsb3ltZW50LCBpdCBpcyBleHBlY3RlZCB0aGF0 IE9TUEZ2Mzxicj4NCiZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDt3b3VsZCBiZSB0cmFuc3BvcnRlZCBvdmVyIElQdjYu JnF1b3Q7ICZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOzxicj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj48YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+ Jm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwO0kgYmVsaWV2ZSB0aGUgJnF1b3Q7cHJvcGVyJnF1b3Q7IHNob3VsZCBiZSBy ZW1vdmVkLiAmbmJzcDsgSWYgdGhlIElQdjYgZGVwbG95bWVudCBpcyBleGFjdGx5IHRoZSBzYW1l PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2PiZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDthcyB0aGUgSVB2NCBkZXBsb3ltZW50LCB0aGVuIGl0 IGlzIGV4cGVjdGVkIHRoYXQgT1NQRnYzIHdvdWxkIGJlIHRyYW5zcG9ydGVkIG92ZXI8L2Rpdj4N CjxkaXY+Jm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwO0lQdjYuICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgQXMgaXQgaXMsaG93IHRoZSBj YXNlIG9mIGVxdWFsIGRlcGxveW1lbnQgaXMgaGFuZGxlZCBpcyB1bnNwZWNpZmllZC48L2Rpdj4N CjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvYmxvY2txdW90ZT4NCjwvc3Bhbj4NCjxkaXY+PGJy Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L3NwYW4+DQo8ZGl2PkkgYWdyZWUuIFdlIHdpbGwgcmVtb3ZlIOKAnHByb3Bl ciZxdW90Oy4mbmJzcDs8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9ibG9ja3F1b3RlPg0KPGRpdj48YnI+DQo8 L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+dGhhbmtzLDwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj5BbGlhJm5ic3A7PC9kaXY+DQo8YmxvY2tx dW90ZSBjbGFzcz0iZ21haWxfcXVvdGUiIHN0eWxlPSJtYXJnaW46MHB4IDBweCAwcHggMC44ZXg7 Ym9yZGVyLWxlZnQtd2lkdGg6MXB4O2JvcmRlci1sZWZ0LXN0eWxlOnNvbGlkO2JvcmRlci1sZWZ0 LWNvbG9yOnJnYigyMDQsMjA0LDIwNCk7cGFkZGluZy1sZWZ0OjFleCI+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJ3 b3JkLXdyYXA6YnJlYWstd29yZDtjb2xvcjpyZ2IoMCwwLDApO2ZvbnQtc2l6ZToxNHB4O2ZvbnQt ZmFtaWx5OkNhbGlicmksc2Fucy1zZXJpZiI+DQo8ZGl2PjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LWZhbWls eTphcmlhbCxzYW5zLXNlcmlmO2ZvbnQtc2l6ZTpzbWFsbDtjb2xvcjpyZ2IoMzQsMzQsMzQpIj4m bmJzcDs8L3NwYW4+PC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvYmxvY2txdW90ZT4NCjxkaXY+Jm5ic3A7PC9k aXY+DQo8YmxvY2txdW90ZSBjbGFzcz0iZ21haWxfcXVvdGUiIHN0eWxlPSJtYXJnaW46MHB4IDBw eCAwcHggMC44ZXg7Ym9yZGVyLWxlZnQtd2lkdGg6MXB4O2JvcmRlci1sZWZ0LXN0eWxlOnNvbGlk O2JvcmRlci1sZWZ0LWNvbG9yOnJnYigyMDQsMjA0LDIwNCk7cGFkZGluZy1sZWZ0OjFleCI+DQo8 ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJ3b3JkLXdyYXA6YnJlYWstd29yZDtjb2xvcjpyZ2IoMCwwLDApO2ZvbnQtc2l6 ZToxNHB4O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OkNhbGlicmksc2Fucy1zZXJpZiI+DQo8ZGl2PjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRp dj5UaGFua3MsPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2PkFjZWUmbmJzcDs8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+ DQo8ZGl2Pjxicj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPHNwYW4+DQo8YmxvY2txdW90ZSBzdHlsZT0iQk9SREVSLUxF RlQ6I2I1YzRkZiA1IHNvbGlkO1BBRERJTkc6MCAwIDAgNTtNQVJHSU46MCAwIDAgNSI+DQo8ZGl2 Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXYgZGlyPSJsdHIiPg0KPGRpdj48YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+VGhhbmtz LDwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj5BbGlhPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Jsb2Nr cXVvdGU+DQo8L3NwYW4+PC9kaXY+DQo8L2Jsb2NrcXVvdGU+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxicj4NCjwvZGl2 Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9ibG9ja3F1b3RlPg0KPC9zcGFuPg0KPC9ib2R5 Pg0KPC9odG1sPg0K --_000_D37F6D6363F25aceeciscocom_-- From nobody Thu Jun 9 21:56:43 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C74F312B006 for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2016 21:56:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ionosnetworks-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uY9lk-mF2rnD for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2016 21:56:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vk0-x22f.google.com (mail-vk0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1CEEB12D134 for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2016 21:56:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vk0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id g67so83278068vkb.3 for ; Thu, 09 Jun 2016 21:56:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ionosnetworks-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=t0ODUvkXXGKokAw0lRkyfurPPtMtUV9D8OKe7dAHvHo=; b=PBLy/vYous/bUAOrsmEtlyndnu7wYyUqkyFpN2vGcOnl/2sezWbHzupFm2/ZB6b8/4 4I2MTF2XUAvNeTUa1n9EUr5ifgcw62FBgA+VczII6C/4Bs1KeCii0qYy4YHIKPP/MkeD PX9N3VgiTGWTQZuqWhLU/LH25gJFmDq+UXWF16V02D5ior6A+H1HxUN4QWExCk9OoTU8 xvHtX2ELHGWhfZ/XV28jvBn2Y9Dx5VK5qd6mi3KCTyuvFS17CuHFuE0sgEBYbzVay76K 2XYzxCXqEGsUQTvSy3eA5ncK/VCz2BQlpa47BqXN1D7Ga4NfL3t11GC87aNpygmYn1WT iv1Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=t0ODUvkXXGKokAw0lRkyfurPPtMtUV9D8OKe7dAHvHo=; b=Oph553qnveYQzujYb8Waz3TttAyRGK5B5+69yBGL1PE7hlMCJOegTzyUqSfUaYRXbE j07cjuqMiJqBuCIDigdRNINKvfcqsZrMY8zdfYGCsjLgHb5spVEbKKUuCNL5jwWekIUt dNs0ehWYm9bl6obt62tHlCLFHctqLrB9qrKIH2hGsXoDCAWu0yjSl1SIRX6B5K6P+qbK sa6kScHlhDSJm+htntodfRhUcvrRDVRFKTSgjxEHKeUJLFQ0669s8dDIYdsIaj7ZtDoH lmYjNcsj0lNUnUD1Z4aGSZJf+ImD8bnE6BYH/YXVWZKwVbviueuUCiy+DJT7sDLosCyJ msRA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tIn2s7lgMgFFs36YGdSVytTPK843yyaFyIM4PMw2dfTGI7b4jxk8NKOBsy9cWrtj83HbBz0qMkqcbsoeA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.176.64.98 with SMTP id h89mr15174uad.89.1465534597127; Thu, 09 Jun 2016 21:56:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.31.107.12 with HTTP; Thu, 9 Jun 2016 21:56:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 10:26:37 +0530 Message-ID: From: Manav Bhatia To: "" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c122f241178820534e55d97 Archived-At: Cc: "rtg-dir@ietf.org" , draft-smirnov-ospf-xaf-te@tools.ietf.org, OSPF WG List Subject: [OSPF] RtgDir review: draft-smirnov-ospf-xaf-te X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 04:56:41 -0000 --94eb2c122f241178820534e55d97 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hello, I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft. The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and sometimes on special request. The purpose of the review is to provide assistance to the Routing ADs. For more information about the Routing Directorate, please see http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, it would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF Last Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through discussion or by updating the draft. Document: draft-smirnov-ospf-xaf-te Reviewer: Manav Bhatia Review Date: 10/06/2016 IETF LC End Date: date-if-known Intended Status: Standards Track Summary: No issues found. This document is ready for publication. The draft proposes something that prima facie appears reasonable -- using a single OSPF instance to set up TE LSPs for both v4 and v6. Comments: The draft is quite simple and i see no technical issues. However, i would like this to go through the regular IETF WG process before it gets pushed to the publication pipeline. Cheers, Manav --94eb2c122f241178820534e55d97 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello,

I have been selected as the Routing Director= ate reviewer for this draft. The Routing Directorate seeks to review all ro= uting or routing-related drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IES= G review, and sometimes on special request. The purpose of the review is to= provide assistance to the Routing ADs. For more information about the Rout= ing Directorate, please see http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir<= br>
Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs= , it would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF = Last Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through dis= cussion or by updating the draft.

Document: draft-smirnov-ospf-xaf-t= e
Reviewer: Manav Bhatia
Review Date: 10/06/2016
IETF LC End Date:= date-if-known
Intended Status: Standards Track =C2=A0

Summary:= No issues found. This document is ready for publication.

The draft = proposes something that prima facie appears reasonable -- using a single OS= PF instance to set up TE LSPs for both v4 and v6.

Comments:
The draft is quite simple and i see no technical issues. However, i would = like this to go through the regular IETF WG process before it gets pushed t= o the publication pipeline.

Cheers, Manav
--94eb2c122f241178820534e55d97-- From nobody Fri Jun 10 06:28:53 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF86112D1E3; Fri, 10 Jun 2016 06:28:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -15.946 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.946 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RO7b6O81UtUr; Fri, 10 Jun 2016 06:28:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alln-iport-1.cisco.com (alln-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.142.88]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D50D412D53B; Fri, 10 Jun 2016 06:28:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=8977; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1465565327; x=1466774927; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=hrKsJp77vayNZQdHS6YtqjAvwoh+WKgv1YTwizhlcqk=; b=kIAXa9Y+/j/ixrFcp8mR6Hjp7JDdmwCepq6Lv/bqwsl6OH+c44FCdHEn lz8KocJsYn//Q1Dk4G8vyFxVBySTwAKAU6eq2rNMIXMhySuYnb7ptEU4I 9cl+O9wucVojg9wYlFH7giIdcZI6tMrrV64KpCG69Ojpru1bUqEGUMLOs E=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0A9AgC/v1pX/4kNJK1dgnBOVn0GthyFA?= =?us-ascii?q?IF6IoVxAhyBCjgUAQEBAQEBAWUnhEUBAQEEI1YQAgEIEQMBAigDAgICMBQJCAI?= =?us-ascii?q?EAQ0FiDAOrT+QYAEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARyKdIIQglCCYYJaBZhfA?= =?us-ascii?q?YYDiCSBaU6EBIhlj2oBDw82g25uAYkIfwEBAQ?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.26,449,1459814400"; d="scan'208,217";a="284166235" Received: from alln-core-4.cisco.com ([173.36.13.137]) by alln-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 10 Jun 2016 13:28:47 +0000 Received: from XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com (xch-rtp-013.cisco.com [64.101.220.153]) by alln-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u5ADSkSO010592 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 10 Jun 2016 13:28:46 GMT Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) by XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com (64.101.220.153) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Fri, 10 Jun 2016 09:28:45 -0400 Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Fri, 10 Jun 2016 09:28:45 -0400 From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" To: Manav Bhatia , "" Thread-Topic: [RTG-DIR] RtgDir review: draft-smirnov-ospf-xaf-te Thread-Index: AQHRwtR9gwO3cHbrt02M1iaIz2RuJp/islUA Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 13:28:45 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.116.152.196] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_D38037C464014aceeciscocom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "rtg-dir@ietf.org" , "draft-smirnov-ospf-xaf-te@tools.ietf.org" , OSPF WG List Subject: Re: [OSPF] [RTG-DIR] RtgDir review: draft-smirnov-ospf-xaf-te X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 13:28:50 -0000 --_000_D38037C464014aceeciscocom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 U3BlYWtpbmcgYXMgV0cgQ28tQ2hhaXI6DQoNClRoZSBmaXJzdCB0aW1lIHdlIHRvb2sgdGhpcyBk cmFmdCB0byBwb2xsIGZvciBhZG9wdGlvbiwgdGhlcmUgd2FzbuKAmXQgbXVjaCBpbnRlcmVzdC4g RHVlIHRvIHRoZSB1dGlsaXR5IG9mIGJlaW5nIGFibGUgdG8gb25seSBhZHZlcnRpc2UgVEUgaW4g ZWl0aGVyIE9TUEZ2MiBvciBPU1BGdjMgaW4gZHVhbCBzdGFjayBkZXBsb3ltZW50cyBjb3VwbGVk IHdpdGggdGhlIHNpbXBsaWNpdHkgb2YgYWxsb3dpbmcgZW5kcG9pbnRzIG9mIGVpdGhlciBhZGRy ZXNzIGZhbWlseSB0byBiZSBhZHZlcnRpc2VkIGluIHRoZSBUTFYtYmFzZWQgVEUgTFNBcyBzZWVt cyBsaWtlIGNvbXBlbGxpbmcgcmVhc29ucyB0byBkbyBzdGFuZGFyZGl6ZSB0aGlzLiBBdCB0aGUg dGltZSwgSSBsaWtlIHRvIGFnYWluIGFzayBmb3IgY29tbWVudHMgZWl0aGVyIGZvciBvciBhZ2Fp bnN0IE9TUEYgV0cgYWRvcHRpb24uDQoNClRoYW5rcywNCkFjZWUNCg0KRnJvbTogcnRnLWRpciA8 cnRnLWRpci1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3JnPG1haWx0bzpydGctZGlyLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmc+ PiBvbiBiZWhhbGYgb2YgTWFuYXYgQmhhdGlhIDxtYW5hdkBpb25vc25ldHdvcmtzLmNvbTxtYWls dG86bWFuYXZAaW9ub3NuZXR3b3Jrcy5jb20+Pg0KRGF0ZTogRnJpZGF5LCBKdW5lIDEwLCAyMDE2 IGF0IDEyOjU2IEFNDQpUbzogIjxydGctYWRzQGlldGYub3JnPG1haWx0bzpydGctYWRzQGlldGYu b3JnPj4iIDxydGctYWRzQGlldGYub3JnPG1haWx0bzpydGctYWRzQGlldGYub3JnPj4NCkNjOiBS b3V0aW5nIERpcmVjdG9yYXRlIDxydGctZGlyQGlldGYub3JnPG1haWx0bzpydGctZGlyQGlldGYu b3JnPj4sICJkcmFmdC1zbWlybm92LW9zcGYteGFmLXRlQHRvb2xzLmlldGYub3JnPG1haWx0bzpk cmFmdC1zbWlybm92LW9zcGYteGFmLXRlQHRvb2xzLmlldGYub3JnPiIgPGRyYWZ0LXNtaXJub3Yt b3NwZi14YWYtdGVAdG9vbHMuaWV0Zi5vcmc8bWFpbHRvOmRyYWZ0LXNtaXJub3Ytb3NwZi14YWYt dGVAdG9vbHMuaWV0Zi5vcmc+PiwgT1NQRiBXRyBMaXN0IDxvc3BmQGlldGYub3JnPG1haWx0bzpv c3BmQGlldGYub3JnPj4NClN1YmplY3Q6IFtSVEctRElSXSBSdGdEaXIgcmV2aWV3OiBkcmFmdC1z bWlybm92LW9zcGYteGFmLXRlDQoNCkhlbGxvLA0KDQpJIGhhdmUgYmVlbiBzZWxlY3RlZCBhcyB0 aGUgUm91dGluZyBEaXJlY3RvcmF0ZSByZXZpZXdlciBmb3IgdGhpcyBkcmFmdC4gVGhlIFJvdXRp bmcgRGlyZWN0b3JhdGUgc2Vla3MgdG8gcmV2aWV3IGFsbCByb3V0aW5nIG9yIHJvdXRpbmctcmVs YXRlZCBkcmFmdHMgYXMgdGhleSBwYXNzIHRocm91Z2ggSUVURiBsYXN0IGNhbGwgYW5kIElFU0cg cmV2aWV3LCBhbmQgc29tZXRpbWVzIG9uIHNwZWNpYWwgcmVxdWVzdC4gVGhlIHB1cnBvc2Ugb2Yg dGhlIHJldmlldyBpcyB0byBwcm92aWRlIGFzc2lzdGFuY2UgdG8gdGhlIFJvdXRpbmcgQURzLiBG b3IgbW9yZSBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBhYm91dCB0aGUgUm91dGluZyBEaXJlY3RvcmF0ZSwgcGxlYXNl IHNlZSBodHRwOi8vdHJhYy50b29scy5pZXRmLm9yZy9hcmVhL3J0Zy90cmFjL3dpa2kvUnRnRGly DQoNCkFsdGhvdWdoIHRoZXNlIGNvbW1lbnRzIGFyZSBwcmltYXJpbHkgZm9yIHRoZSB1c2Ugb2Yg dGhlIFJvdXRpbmcgQURzLCBpdCB3b3VsZCBiZSBoZWxwZnVsIGlmIHlvdSBjb3VsZCBjb25zaWRl ciB0aGVtIGFsb25nIHdpdGggYW55IG90aGVyIElFVEYgTGFzdCBDYWxsIGNvbW1lbnRzIHRoYXQg eW91IHJlY2VpdmUsIGFuZCBzdHJpdmUgdG8gcmVzb2x2ZSB0aGVtIHRocm91Z2ggZGlzY3Vzc2lv biBvciBieSB1cGRhdGluZyB0aGUgZHJhZnQuDQoNCkRvY3VtZW50OiBkcmFmdC1zbWlybm92LW9z cGYteGFmLXRlDQpSZXZpZXdlcjogTWFuYXYgQmhhdGlhDQpSZXZpZXcgRGF0ZTogMTAvMDYvMjAx Ng0KSUVURiBMQyBFbmQgRGF0ZTogZGF0ZS1pZi1rbm93bg0KSW50ZW5kZWQgU3RhdHVzOiBTdGFu ZGFyZHMgVHJhY2sNCg0KU3VtbWFyeTogTm8gaXNzdWVzIGZvdW5kLiBUaGlzIGRvY3VtZW50IGlz IHJlYWR5IGZvciBwdWJsaWNhdGlvbi4NCg0KVGhlIGRyYWZ0IHByb3Bvc2VzIHNvbWV0aGluZyB0 aGF0IHByaW1hIGZhY2llIGFwcGVhcnMgcmVhc29uYWJsZSAtLSB1c2luZyBhIHNpbmdsZSBPU1BG IGluc3RhbmNlIHRvIHNldCB1cCBURSBMU1BzIGZvciBib3RoIHY0IGFuZCB2Ni4NCg0KQ29tbWVu dHM6DQoNClRoZSBkcmFmdCBpcyBxdWl0ZSBzaW1wbGUgYW5kIGkgc2VlIG5vIHRlY2huaWNhbCBp c3N1ZXMuIEhvd2V2ZXIsIGkgd291bGQgbGlrZSB0aGlzIHRvIGdvIHRocm91Z2ggdGhlIHJlZ3Vs YXIgSUVURiBXRyBwcm9jZXNzIGJlZm9yZSBpdCBnZXRzIHB1c2hlZCB0byB0aGUgcHVibGljYXRp b24gcGlwZWxpbmUuDQoNCkNoZWVycywgTWFuYXYNCg== --_000_D38037C464014aceeciscocom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWw+DQo8aGVhZD4NCjxtZXRhIGh0dHAtZXF1aXY9IkNvbnRlbnQtVHlwZSIgY29udGVudD0i dGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PXV0Zi04Ij4NCjwvaGVhZD4NCjxib2R5IHN0eWxlPSJ3b3JkLXdy YXA6IGJyZWFrLXdvcmQ7IC13ZWJraXQtbmJzcC1tb2RlOiBzcGFjZTsgLXdlYmtpdC1saW5lLWJy ZWFrOiBhZnRlci13aGl0ZS1zcGFjZTsgY29sb3I6IHJnYigwLCAwLCAwKTsgZm9udC1zaXplOiAx NHB4OyBmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ2FsaWJyaSwgc2Fucy1zZXJpZjsiPg0KPGRpdj5TcGVha2luZyBh cyBXRyBDby1DaGFpcjo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2PlRoZSBmaXJzdCB0 aW1lIHdlIHRvb2sgdGhpcyBkcmFmdCB0byBwb2xsIGZvciBhZG9wdGlvbiwgdGhlcmUgd2FzbuKA mXQgbXVjaCBpbnRlcmVzdC4gRHVlIHRvIHRoZSB1dGlsaXR5IG9mIGJlaW5nIGFibGUgdG8gb25s eSBhZHZlcnRpc2UgVEUgaW4gZWl0aGVyIE9TUEZ2MiBvciBPU1BGdjMgaW4gZHVhbCBzdGFjayBk ZXBsb3ltZW50cyBjb3VwbGVkIHdpdGggdGhlIHNpbXBsaWNpdHkgb2YgYWxsb3dpbmcgZW5kcG9p bnRzIG9mIGVpdGhlciBhZGRyZXNzDQogZmFtaWx5IHRvIGJlIGFkdmVydGlzZWQgaW4gdGhlIFRM Vi1iYXNlZCBURSBMU0FzIHNlZW1zIGxpa2UgY29tcGVsbGluZyByZWFzb25zIHRvIGRvIHN0YW5k YXJkaXplIHRoaXMuIEF0IHRoZSB0aW1lLCBJIGxpa2UgdG8gYWdhaW4gYXNrIGZvciBjb21tZW50 cyBlaXRoZXIgZm9yIG9yIGFnYWluc3QgT1NQRiBXRyBhZG9wdGlvbi4mbmJzcDs8L2Rpdj4NCjxk aXY+PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2PlRoYW5rcyw8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+QWNlZTwvZGl2Pg0KPGRp dj48YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxzcGFuIGlkPSJPTEtfU1JDX0JPRFlfU0VDVElPTiI+DQo8ZGl2IHN0 eWxlPSJmb250LWZhbWlseTpDYWxpYnJpOyBmb250LXNpemU6MTFwdDsgdGV4dC1hbGlnbjpsZWZ0 OyBjb2xvcjpibGFjazsgQk9SREVSLUJPVFRPTTogbWVkaXVtIG5vbmU7IEJPUkRFUi1MRUZUOiBt ZWRpdW0gbm9uZTsgUEFERElORy1CT1RUT006IDBpbjsgUEFERElORy1MRUZUOiAwaW47IFBBRERJ TkctUklHSFQ6IDBpbjsgQk9SREVSLVRPUDogI2I1YzRkZiAxcHQgc29saWQ7IEJPUkRFUi1SSUdI VDogbWVkaXVtIG5vbmU7IFBBRERJTkctVE9QOiAzcHQiPg0KPHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtd2Vp Z2h0OmJvbGQiPkZyb206IDwvc3Bhbj5ydGctZGlyICZsdDs8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86cnRnLWRp ci1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3JnIj5ydGctZGlyLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmc8L2E+Jmd0OyBvbiBi ZWhhbGYgb2YgTWFuYXYgQmhhdGlhICZsdDs8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86bWFuYXZAaW9ub3NuZXR3 b3Jrcy5jb20iPm1hbmF2QGlvbm9zbmV0d29ya3MuY29tPC9hPiZndDs8YnI+DQo8c3BhbiBzdHls ZT0iZm9udC13ZWlnaHQ6Ym9sZCI+RGF0ZTogPC9zcGFuPkZyaWRheSwgSnVuZSAxMCwgMjAxNiBh dCAxMjo1NiBBTTxicj4NCjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXdlaWdodDpib2xkIj5UbzogPC9zcGFu PiZxdW90OyZsdDs8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86cnRnLWFkc0BpZXRmLm9yZyI+cnRnLWFkc0BpZXRm Lm9yZzwvYT4mZ3Q7JnF1b3Q7ICZsdDs8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86cnRnLWFkc0BpZXRmLm9yZyI+ cnRnLWFkc0BpZXRmLm9yZzwvYT4mZ3Q7PGJyPg0KPHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtd2VpZ2h0OmJv bGQiPkNjOiA8L3NwYW4+Um91dGluZyBEaXJlY3RvcmF0ZSAmbHQ7PGEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOnJ0 Zy1kaXJAaWV0Zi5vcmciPnJ0Zy1kaXJAaWV0Zi5vcmc8L2E+Jmd0OywgJnF1b3Q7PGEgaHJlZj0i bWFpbHRvOmRyYWZ0LXNtaXJub3Ytb3NwZi14YWYtdGVAdG9vbHMuaWV0Zi5vcmciPmRyYWZ0LXNt aXJub3Ytb3NwZi14YWYtdGVAdG9vbHMuaWV0Zi5vcmc8L2E+JnF1b3Q7ICZsdDs8YSBocmVmPSJt YWlsdG86ZHJhZnQtc21pcm5vdi1vc3BmLXhhZi10ZUB0b29scy5pZXRmLm9yZyI+ZHJhZnQtc21p cm5vdi1vc3BmLXhhZi10ZUB0b29scy5pZXRmLm9yZzwvYT4mZ3Q7LA0KIE9TUEYgV0cgTGlzdCAm bHQ7PGEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOm9zcGZAaWV0Zi5vcmciPm9zcGZAaWV0Zi5vcmc8L2E+Jmd0Ozxi cj4NCjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXdlaWdodDpib2xkIj5TdWJqZWN0OiA8L3NwYW4+W1JURy1E SVJdIFJ0Z0RpciByZXZpZXc6IGRyYWZ0LXNtaXJub3Ytb3NwZi14YWYtdGU8YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4N CjxkaXY+PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8YmxvY2txdW90ZSBpZD0iTUFDX09VVExPT0tfQVRUUklCVVRJ T05fQkxPQ0tRVU9URSIgc3R5bGU9IkJPUkRFUi1MRUZUOiAjYjVjNGRmIDUgc29saWQ7IFBBRERJ Tkc6MCAwIDAgNTsgTUFSR0lOOjAgMCAwIDU7Ij4NCjxkaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBkaXI9Imx0 ciI+SGVsbG8sPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KSSBoYXZlIGJlZW4gc2VsZWN0ZWQgYXMgdGhlIFJvdXRpbmcg RGlyZWN0b3JhdGUgcmV2aWV3ZXIgZm9yIHRoaXMgZHJhZnQuIFRoZSBSb3V0aW5nIERpcmVjdG9y YXRlIHNlZWtzIHRvIHJldmlldyBhbGwgcm91dGluZyBvciByb3V0aW5nLXJlbGF0ZWQgZHJhZnRz IGFzIHRoZXkgcGFzcyB0aHJvdWdoIElFVEYgbGFzdCBjYWxsIGFuZCBJRVNHIHJldmlldywgYW5k IHNvbWV0aW1lcyBvbiBzcGVjaWFsIHJlcXVlc3QuIFRoZSBwdXJwb3NlIG9mIHRoZQ0KIHJldmll dyBpcyB0byBwcm92aWRlIGFzc2lzdGFuY2UgdG8gdGhlIFJvdXRpbmcgQURzLiBGb3IgbW9yZSBp bmZvcm1hdGlvbiBhYm91dCB0aGUgUm91dGluZyBEaXJlY3RvcmF0ZSwgcGxlYXNlIHNlZQ0KPGEg aHJlZj0iaHR0cDovL3RyYWMudG9vbHMuaWV0Zi5vcmcvYXJlYS9ydGcvdHJhYy93aWtpL1J0Z0Rp ciI+aHR0cDovL3RyYWMudG9vbHMuaWV0Zi5vcmcvYXJlYS9ydGcvdHJhYy93aWtpL1J0Z0Rpcjwv YT48YnI+DQo8YnI+DQpBbHRob3VnaCB0aGVzZSBjb21tZW50cyBhcmUgcHJpbWFyaWx5IGZvciB0 aGUgdXNlIG9mIHRoZSBSb3V0aW5nIEFEcywgaXQgd291bGQgYmUgaGVscGZ1bCBpZiB5b3UgY291 bGQgY29uc2lkZXIgdGhlbSBhbG9uZyB3aXRoIGFueSBvdGhlciBJRVRGIExhc3QgQ2FsbCBjb21t ZW50cyB0aGF0IHlvdSByZWNlaXZlLCBhbmQgc3RyaXZlIHRvIHJlc29sdmUgdGhlbSB0aHJvdWdo IGRpc2N1c3Npb24gb3IgYnkgdXBkYXRpbmcgdGhlIGRyYWZ0Ljxicj4NCjxicj4NCkRvY3VtZW50 OiBkcmFmdC1zbWlybm92LW9zcGYteGFmLXRlPGJyPg0KUmV2aWV3ZXI6IE1hbmF2IEJoYXRpYTxi cj4NClJldmlldyBEYXRlOiAxMC8wNi8yMDE2PGJyPg0KSUVURiBMQyBFbmQgRGF0ZTogZGF0ZS1p Zi1rbm93biA8YnI+DQpJbnRlbmRlZCBTdGF0dXM6IFN0YW5kYXJkcyBUcmFjayAmbmJzcDsgPGJy Pg0KPGJyPg0KU3VtbWFyeTogTm8gaXNzdWVzIGZvdW5kLiBUaGlzIGRvY3VtZW50IGlzIHJlYWR5 IGZvciBwdWJsaWNhdGlvbi48YnI+DQo8YnI+DQpUaGUgZHJhZnQgcHJvcG9zZXMgc29tZXRoaW5n IHRoYXQgcHJpbWEgZmFjaWUgYXBwZWFycyByZWFzb25hYmxlIC0tIHVzaW5nIGEgc2luZ2xlIE9T UEYgaW5zdGFuY2UgdG8gc2V0IHVwIFRFIExTUHMgZm9yIGJvdGggdjQgYW5kIHY2Lg0KPGJyPg0K PGJyPg0KQ29tbWVudHM6IDxicj4NCjxicj4NClRoZSBkcmFmdCBpcyBxdWl0ZSBzaW1wbGUgYW5k IGkgc2VlIG5vIHRlY2huaWNhbCBpc3N1ZXMuIEhvd2V2ZXIsIGkgd291bGQgbGlrZSB0aGlzIHRv IGdvIHRocm91Z2ggdGhlIHJlZ3VsYXIgSUVURiBXRyBwcm9jZXNzIGJlZm9yZSBpdCBnZXRzIHB1 c2hlZCB0byB0aGUgcHVibGljYXRpb24gcGlwZWxpbmUuPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KQ2hlZXJzLCBNYW5h djwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvYmxvY2txdW90ZT4NCjwvc3Bhbj4NCjwvYm9keT4N CjwvaHRtbD4NCg== --_000_D38037C464014aceeciscocom_-- From nobody Mon Jun 13 16:46:09 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietf.org Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDF7F12D561; Mon, 13 Jun 2016 16:46:07 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.22.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20160613234607.6943.36912.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 16:46:07 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: ospf@ietf.org Subject: [OSPF] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3-08.txt X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 23:46:08 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Open Shortest Path First IGP of the IETF. Title : OSPFv3 over IPv4 for IPv6 Transition Authors : I. Chen A. Lindem R. Atkinson Filename : draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3-08.txt Pages : 10 Date : 2016-06-13 Abstract: This document defines a mechanism to use IPv4 to transport OSPFv3 packets. Using OSPFv3 over IPv4 with the existing OSPFv3 Address Family extension can simplify transition from an OSPFv2 IPv4-only routing domain to an OSPFv3 dual-stack routing domain. This document updates RFC 5838 to support virtual links in the IPv4 unicast address family when using OSPFv3 over IPv4. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3/ There's also a htmlized version available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3-08 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3-08 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Mon Jun 13 17:41:39 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F31212D0C5 for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2016 17:40:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.926 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.926 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, MISSING_HEADERS=1.021, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KVK-g9nx9fBJ for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2016 17:40:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alln-iport-4.cisco.com (alln-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.142.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB84F12D1CA for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2016 17:40:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2558; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1465864811; x=1467074411; h=from:cc:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-id:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=ypS8ZOYjzFwb2j+zP9oX9AvZffuCSVx+1KmSaxxeD/k=; b=PSqvfsYzoB3eqWMt5vtgHLJrRrdwPhB+6AkuaDT5ISizFXVrKvz4IsBK 7jOQ1AK/ihf70EhjKTfCcoFfSzY73Hw+zQl987DLph4lpxldkzM0BOY8t 9ziJ5mlGAwAgKnb1bcVp1Qseu/FyQhJ8vyjlDtDxyFEWu+OpSr8UB0oFf 0=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0ArAgAkUl9X/5RdJa1cgz5WcQwGp0qTY?= =?us-ascii?q?oF5Fw2FcwIcDIEHOBQBAQEBAQEBZSeEQwkBAQQBAQEgEToLEAIBCBoCJgICAiU?= =?us-ascii?q?LFRACEgWFcoI+DqkSkScBAQEBAQEEAQEBAQEBASCBAYlzhECDARCCSgWYYgGGA?= =?us-ascii?q?4gkgWlOhASIZo9wAR42g25uiQl/AQEF?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.26,469,1459814400"; d="scan'208";a="284399319" Received: from rcdn-core-12.cisco.com ([173.37.93.148]) by alln-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 14 Jun 2016 00:40:10 +0000 Received: from XCH-RTP-012.cisco.com (xch-rtp-012.cisco.com [64.101.220.152]) by rcdn-core-12.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u5E0eAn1029226 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2016 00:40:10 GMT Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) by XCH-RTP-012.cisco.com (64.101.220.152) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Mon, 13 Jun 2016 20:40:09 -0400 Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Mon, 13 Jun 2016 20:40:09 -0400 From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" CC: "ospf@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [OSPF] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3-08.txt Thread-Index: AQHRxc3H7PEvtypZjECDiVxoK29bV5/oHviA Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 00:40:09 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20160613234607.6943.36912.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20160613234607.6943.36912.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.116.152.197] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <03532F659F49504890C067C0C418DF9F@emea.cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [OSPF] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3-08.txt X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 00:40:15 -0000 VGhpcyByZXZpc2lvbiBpbmNsdWRlcyBBbGlh4oCZcyBBRCBjb21tZW50cy4NClRoYW5rcywNCkFj ZWUgDQoNCk9uIDYvMTMvMTYsIDc6NDYgUE0sICJPU1BGIG9uIGJlaGFsZiBvZiBpbnRlcm5ldC1k cmFmdHNAaWV0Zi5vcmciDQo8b3NwZi1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3JnIG9uIGJlaGFsZiBvZiBpbnRl cm5ldC1kcmFmdHNAaWV0Zi5vcmc+IHdyb3RlOg0KDQo+DQo+QSBOZXcgSW50ZXJuZXQtRHJhZnQg aXMgYXZhaWxhYmxlIGZyb20gdGhlIG9uLWxpbmUgSW50ZXJuZXQtRHJhZnRzDQo+ZGlyZWN0b3Jp ZXMuDQo+VGhpcyBkcmFmdCBpcyBhIHdvcmsgaXRlbSBvZiB0aGUgT3BlbiBTaG9ydGVzdCBQYXRo IEZpcnN0IElHUCBvZiB0aGUgSUVURi4NCj4NCj4gICAgICAgIFRpdGxlICAgICAgICAgICA6IE9T UEZ2MyBvdmVyIElQdjQgZm9yIElQdjYgVHJhbnNpdGlvbg0KPiAgICAgICAgQXV0aG9ycyAgICAg ICAgIDogSS4gQ2hlbg0KPiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgQS4gTGluZGVtDQo+ICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBSLiBBdGtpbnNvbg0KPglGaWxlbmFtZSAgICAgICAgOiBk cmFmdC1pZXRmLW9zcGYtdHJhbnNpdGlvbi10by1vc3BmdjMtMDgudHh0DQo+CVBhZ2VzICAgICAg ICAgICA6IDEwDQo+CURhdGUgICAgICAgICAgICA6IDIwMTYtMDYtMTMNCj4NCj5BYnN0cmFjdDoN Cj4gICBUaGlzIGRvY3VtZW50IGRlZmluZXMgYSBtZWNoYW5pc20gdG8gdXNlIElQdjQgdG8gdHJh bnNwb3J0IE9TUEZ2Mw0KPiAgIHBhY2tldHMuICBVc2luZyBPU1BGdjMgb3ZlciBJUHY0IHdpdGgg dGhlIGV4aXN0aW5nIE9TUEZ2MyBBZGRyZXNzDQo+ICAgRmFtaWx5IGV4dGVuc2lvbiBjYW4gc2lt cGxpZnkgdHJhbnNpdGlvbiBmcm9tIGFuIE9TUEZ2MiBJUHY0LW9ubHkNCj4gICByb3V0aW5nIGRv bWFpbiB0byBhbiBPU1BGdjMgZHVhbC1zdGFjayByb3V0aW5nIGRvbWFpbi4gIFRoaXMgZG9jdW1l bnQNCj4gICB1cGRhdGVzIFJGQyA1ODM4IHRvIHN1cHBvcnQgdmlydHVhbCBsaW5rcyBpbiB0aGUg SVB2NCB1bmljYXN0IGFkZHJlc3MNCj4gICBmYW1pbHkgd2hlbiB1c2luZyBPU1BGdjMgb3ZlciBJ UHY0Lg0KPg0KPg0KPlRoZSBJRVRGIGRhdGF0cmFja2VyIHN0YXR1cyBwYWdlIGZvciB0aGlzIGRy YWZ0IGlzOg0KPmh0dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0Zi5vcmcvZG9jL2RyYWZ0LWlldGYtb3Nw Zi10cmFuc2l0aW9uLXRvLW9zcGZ2My8NCj4NCj5UaGVyZSdzIGFsc28gYSBodG1saXplZCB2ZXJz aW9uIGF2YWlsYWJsZSBhdDoNCj5odHRwczovL3Rvb2xzLmlldGYub3JnL2h0bWwvZHJhZnQtaWV0 Zi1vc3BmLXRyYW5zaXRpb24tdG8tb3NwZnYzLTA4DQo+DQo+QSBkaWZmIGZyb20gdGhlIHByZXZp b3VzIHZlcnNpb24gaXMgYXZhaWxhYmxlIGF0Og0KPmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL3JmY2Rp ZmY/dXJsMj1kcmFmdC1pZXRmLW9zcGYtdHJhbnNpdGlvbi10by1vc3BmdjMtMDgNCj4NCj4NCj5Q bGVhc2Ugbm90ZSB0aGF0IGl0IG1heSB0YWtlIGEgY291cGxlIG9mIG1pbnV0ZXMgZnJvbSB0aGUg dGltZSBvZg0KPnN1Ym1pc3Npb24NCj51bnRpbCB0aGUgaHRtbGl6ZWQgdmVyc2lvbiBhbmQgZGlm ZiBhcmUgYXZhaWxhYmxlIGF0IHRvb2xzLmlldGYub3JnLg0KPg0KPkludGVybmV0LURyYWZ0cyBh cmUgYWxzbyBhdmFpbGFibGUgYnkgYW5vbnltb3VzIEZUUCBhdDoNCj5mdHA6Ly9mdHAuaWV0Zi5v cmcvaW50ZXJuZXQtZHJhZnRzLw0KPg0KPl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQo+T1NQRiBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QNCj5PU1BGQGlldGYub3JnDQo+aHR0 cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9vc3BmDQoNCg== From nobody Wed Jun 15 15:47:25 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietf.org Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1E4212D0D1; Wed, 15 Jun 2016 15:47:23 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: IETF Secretariat To: X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.22.2 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20160615224723.26169.55291.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 15:47:23 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: ospf@ietf.org, ipr-announce@ietf.org Subject: [OSPF] IPR Disclosure Cisco Systems, Inc.'s Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 22:47:24 -0000 Dear Peter Psenak, Stefano Previdi, Clarence Filsfils, Wim Henderickx, Jeff Tantsura, Hannes Gredler, Rob Shakir: An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled "OSPF Extensions for Segment Routing" (draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions) was submitted to the IETF Secretariat on and has been posted on the "IETF Page of Intellectual Property Rights Disclosures" (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2808/). The title of the IPR disclosure is "Cisco Systems, Inc.'s Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions" Thank you IETF Secretariat From nobody Wed Jun 15 16:09:17 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45E0212D7D5; Wed, 15 Jun 2016 16:09:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id knw31HeIUkjT; Wed, 15 Jun 2016 16:09:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qk0-x236.google.com (mail-qk0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A3F9812D828; Wed, 15 Jun 2016 16:09:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk0-x236.google.com with SMTP id s186so38472203qkc.1; Wed, 15 Jun 2016 16:09:13 -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; bh=IrY+jzwzt6oU+2F7iRpv0kjoJ2WkDor6XfoRJVRtSZA=; b=EGTKe0Wpg7XLFXbetACbD9ANnDLNypenW7xYVb/V+k0VeT24f7Kl3fGS95iaw7LA9I y9NFkxR70/YOpwZEQkbg9O07aDYrT3328SlN5BCP5cvc/o5m/tWzurLuW38ENyrv4OFr SK0JOgGjlrNBF1AsHxX3qXWiDoCMG/YQGSM21gSVNn7c2Cuivb3y4XZ30jDvmnmojxVX BqYRivjkg1s/17JEJ4O6SoNq+fa0HEPKDSV/cJBV72/EX3lqdS8xVxkGQCO+BzlfavZF pjbGEetygBh1aJd2/gw6nIEWViRR6YIm7S/PJ1Z7DRlzK8en1cusGTXe3EH3XBX2n2UA VOjw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=IrY+jzwzt6oU+2F7iRpv0kjoJ2WkDor6XfoRJVRtSZA=; b=lQGaooq7rw4Mz9H87xc03oA6uWe50hZa/U7NY3spd6iFiIsfMiGwuumCWdlQuycc+U y3XFtXvBjuLdSCYcKq9V14gWFNgu5o2DiL0VYbqAN2GhtUHnnKdF2+/Oj5UmsgDEa0jc 5j8fIaZZKcHVf2J/gGhKIA0WsshQ5U3LNuOa/M0IrAY8uVaaUB30GUzLg+YB+CBwCHRD qSojVk+nNzpwCO9jm1vwtcjEMKG09H18tWoEp8pYxN/TRQQiBeomgOAzGpkGnD3udTWw C87lVxW9iLTmDzQ1+TjNtuvtQY2gOZlatHkPHZ7J5MDJ2MC3s0WGHT+ASwLxOVOxSrN8 3JJg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tJoLOY4jJd6s7MJhkDP3BuquX5O2sVhZ5XThEyWEj+6Hld/mGxWrl5em3YgZ/DrKch8MwxwxQCXQFYcvw== X-Received: by 10.233.237.14 with SMTP id c14mr1396677qkg.88.1466032152790; Wed, 15 Jun 2016 16:09:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.200.57.81 with HTTP; Wed, 15 Jun 2016 16:09:11 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20160615224723.26169.55291.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <20160615224723.26169.55291.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> From: Alia Atlas Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 19:09:11 -0400 Message-ID: To: OSPF List , draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c0c0a06b24b3c05355935c8 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [OSPF] IPR Disclosure Cisco Systems, Inc.'s Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 23:09:15 -0000 --94eb2c0c0a06b24b3c05355935c8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Stefano, Clarence, and Peter, Could you please clarify if this IPR disclosure is simply updating the previously disclosed IPR or represents additional IPR? I do see that there is at least some overlap. Thanks, Alia On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 6:47 PM, IETF Secretariat wrote: > Dear Peter Psenak, Stefano Previdi, Clarence Filsfils, Wim Henderickx, > Jeff Tantsura, Hannes Gredler, Rob Shakir: > > > An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled "OSPF > Extensions for Segment Routing" > (draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions) was submitted to the IETF > Secretariat on and has been posted on the "IETF Page of Intellectual > Property > Rights Disclosures" (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2808/). The title > of the > IPR disclosure is "Cisco Systems, Inc.'s Statement about IPR related to > draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions" > > > Thank you > > IETF Secretariat > > _______________________________________________ > OSPF mailing list > OSPF@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf > --94eb2c0c0a06b24b3c05355935c8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Stefano, Clarence, and Peter,

Could you= please clarify if this IPR disclosure is simply updating the previously
disclosed IPR or represents additional IPR?

I do see that there is at least some overlap.

Th= anks,
Alia

On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 6:47 PM, IETF Secretariat <ietf-i= pr@ietf.org> wrote:
Dear Pe= ter Psenak, Stefano Previdi, Clarence Filsfils, Wim Henderickx, Jeff Tantsu= ra, Hannes Gredler, Rob Shakir:


An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled "OSPF<= br> Extensions for Segment Routing"
(draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions) was submitted to the IETF
Secretariat on=C2=A0 and has been posted on the "IETF Page of Intellec= tual Property
Rights Disclosures" (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/280= 8/). The title of the
IPR disclosure is "Cisco Systems, Inc.'s Statement about IPR relat= ed to
draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions"


Thank you

IETF Secretariat

_______________________________________________
OSPF mailing list
OSPF@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf

--94eb2c0c0a06b24b3c05355935c8-- From nobody Thu Jun 16 00:03:25 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8A5012B038; Thu, 16 Jun 2016 00:03:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -15.947 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.947 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cI602TaKuRxk; Thu, 16 Jun 2016 00:03:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from aer-iport-3.cisco.com (aer-iport-3.cisco.com [173.38.203.53]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C832D12D0F7; Thu, 16 Jun 2016 00:03:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1372; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1466060603; x=1467270203; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=0yRlkpe2DrkjIMVcGNQv1BP3Las+yaJzvgIqeCcrkeA=; b=YRi55PiEAK3z5NhEqGLexNhpqYiKErhUxicnXftROhLjBDgo8PCvHpBW 35P5Qu3333wGWLsFPZRBTE9NlhJ/VShutPpI4PSH+SND+y7Z9YW9vjB1g 3d/hOjrv4Z1JbV3fZSEc/GqcXGzqB5+5rcddvGmhc2YQiKc7lOXZ0jabq o=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0CtBADtTWJX/xbLJq1dhBR9vFUXC4V1A?= =?us-ascii?q?oFxAQEBAQEBZieESwEBAQMBAQEBIBU2ChELDgoCAgUWBAQDAgIJAwIBAgEVHxE?= =?us-ascii?q?GAQwGAgEBiCQIDq5ZkGYBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEaBYEBhSaETYdBgloBB?= =?us-ascii?q?JhwhgWIJIFphFKDCoVdj3RUgjqBNzoyigQBAQE?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.26,478,1459814400"; d="scan'208";a="636219717" Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-1.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Jun 2016 07:03:20 +0000 Received: from [10.60.140.60] (ams-ppsenak-nitro11.cisco.com [10.60.140.60]) by aer-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u5G73Kqw001772; Thu, 16 Jun 2016 07:03:20 GMT Message-ID: <57624F51.1050400@cisco.com> Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 09:03:45 +0200 From: Peter Psenak User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alia Atlas , OSPF List , draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org References: <20160615224723.26169.55291.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [OSPF] IPR Disclosure Cisco Systems, Inc.'s Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 07:03:25 -0000 Alia, On 6/16/16 01:09 , Alia Atlas wrote: > Stefano, Clarence, and Peter, > > Could you please clarify if this IPR disclosure is simply updating the > previously > disclosed IPR or represents additional IPR? we updated the previous IPR with additional patent application. thanks, Peter > > I do see that there is at least some overlap. > > Thanks, > Alia > > On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 6:47 PM, IETF Secretariat > wrote: > > Dear Peter Psenak, Stefano Previdi, Clarence Filsfils, Wim > Henderickx, Jeff Tantsura, Hannes Gredler, Rob Shakir: > > > An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled "OSPF > Extensions for Segment Routing" > (draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions) was submitted to the IETF > Secretariat on and has been posted on the "IETF Page of > Intellectual Property > Rights Disclosures" (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2808/). The > title of the > IPR disclosure is "Cisco Systems, Inc.'s Statement about IPR related to > draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions" > > > Thank you > > IETF Secretariat > > _______________________________________________ > OSPF mailing list > OSPF@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf > > From nobody Thu Jun 16 07:28:06 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7CF512D192; Thu, 16 Jun 2016 07:28:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SF6rbCzOZjkJ; Thu, 16 Jun 2016 07:28:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qk0-x233.google.com (mail-qk0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED7CF12D18C; Thu, 16 Jun 2016 07:28:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk0-x233.google.com with SMTP id p10so54613760qke.3; Thu, 16 Jun 2016 07:28:02 -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; bh=CJWTtv6SBwq2OYb0TxvOEe0uBXE1mzSMijQ+mUh7WUM=; b=fjJ1suYiZgkMIb4BAm5ofb9I8xvT7/iZGjL+TzatpwQAYMuId2heEd6pVNrGxcYX4Q 7u/7RLydH+BS9qfhbDvrxTnNk29PRacSarUclssBUjp40gsQBKRXMFXXoSJqJB7srwAh Xb25BfUWTQtOE96/9SMZGljuB+865LGmiqkwmPE4qcf9rFE/yzNHQUL262NThilbwgSf hUosw1tMqNy3IPesnB3fyHzKzcBdJ4aETdjLkgvxaSwFUKSkECNKALBfIRQADV869dUS wuKZ7yhQblgAs5KaFU0g3igj2zdr+Y+ntMUnElgAo4M6fD5fb8mZA94AbmP346icVxvT cBwA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=CJWTtv6SBwq2OYb0TxvOEe0uBXE1mzSMijQ+mUh7WUM=; b=IZwDAACp8tIiln6cigSWfOc5WDIxa4y38j8a6iM2zcEu083dAyE7mLch0nfovZf2Ql FmDn+HIZ8fzdViQ1di5MSaF3XQqbkJ272A9UujZ1Xb/Zrw6Nliv8rMAoDd1ugqHkKCSP bi2ZNYe0GQt8sezrasQXReHKPikSw626r/reY4kHai7UrTgbIOlNmrFQkdshYM7f0phg SOAa8pSfA1kYKIxjjTFzXy4DZZbFt0GZTm20WWvWqdDpuEnUjXnHovfcGY2g0tN77sTU AeTQEL9Lx4x0Jq1QocmCbHptCpgQj9bkAhly+6uxrljGeBNtSWA10tY4DjanxAmNi0F5 4g6Q== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tLdI9hCzXbPXFxhAVRtI9TKj737KtPDy+xtAyIK5+0Qqm+X52LOtd4+U8YWTn14vjlx7PRe+MghFtxgfA== X-Received: by 10.55.87.194 with SMTP id l185mr2130290qkb.204.1466087282100; Thu, 16 Jun 2016 07:28:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.200.57.81 with HTTP; Thu, 16 Jun 2016 07:28:01 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <57624F51.1050400@cisco.com> References: <20160615224723.26169.55291.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <57624F51.1050400@cisco.com> From: Alia Atlas Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 10:28:01 -0400 Message-ID: To: Peter Psenak Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114e7322a8d4070535660b87 Archived-At: Cc: draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org, OSPF List Subject: Re: [OSPF] IPR Disclosure Cisco Systems, Inc.'s Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 14:28:05 -0000 --001a114e7322a8d4070535660b87 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Peter, On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 3:03 AM, Peter Psenak wrote: > Alia, > > On 6/16/16 01:09 , Alia Atlas wrote: > >> Stefano, Clarence, and Peter, >> >> Could you please clarify if this IPR disclosure is simply updating the >> previously >> disclosed IPR or represents additional IPR? >> > > we updated the previous IPR with additional patent application. > Ok - this is after the confirmations on the list that there was no new IPR? That sounds like new IPR to me. While I realize that the company claiming IPR and the terms haven't changed, since the IPR has changed, I think this needs to go back to the WG for an additional WGLC. Regards, Alia > thanks, > Peter > > >> I do see that there is at least some overlap. >> >> Thanks, >> Alia >> >> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 6:47 PM, IETF Secretariat > > wrote: >> >> Dear Peter Psenak, Stefano Previdi, Clarence Filsfils, Wim >> Henderickx, Jeff Tantsura, Hannes Gredler, Rob Shakir: >> >> >> An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled "OSPF >> Extensions for Segment Routing" >> (draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions) was submitted to the IETF >> Secretariat on and has been posted on the "IETF Page of >> Intellectual Property >> Rights Disclosures" (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2808/). The >> title of the >> IPR disclosure is "Cisco Systems, Inc.'s Statement about IPR related >> to >> draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions" >> >> >> Thank you >> >> IETF Secretariat >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OSPF mailing list >> OSPF@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf >> >> >> > --001a114e7322a8d4070535660b87 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Peter,

On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 3:03 AM, Peter Psenak <ppsenak@ci= sco.com> wrote:
Alia,

On 6/16/16 01:09 , Alia Atlas wrote:
Stefano, Clarence, and Peter,

Could you please clarify if this IPR disclosure is simply updating the
previously
disclosed IPR or represents additional IPR?

 we updated the previous IPR with additional patent application.

Ok - this is after the confirmations on the list t= hat there was no new IPR?
That sounds like new IPR to me.

While I realize that the company claiming IPR and the ter= ms haven't changed, since
the IPR has changed, I think this n= eeds to go back to the WG for an additional WGLC.

= Regards,
Alia

=C2=A0
thanks,
Peter


I do see that there is at least some overlap.

Thanks,
Alia

On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 6:47 PM, IETF Secretariat <ietf-ipr@ietf.org
 <mailto:ietf-ipr@= ietf.org>> wrote:

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Dear Peter Psenak, Stefano Previdi, Clarence Filsfils, Wim =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Henderickx, Jeff Tantsura, Hannes Gredler, Rob Shakir:


=C2=A0 =C2=A0 An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitl= ed "OSPF
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Extensions for Segment Routing"
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 (draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions) was submitted to= the IETF
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Secretariat on=C2=A0 and has been posted on the "IETF Pa= ge of
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Intellectual Property
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Rights Disclosures" (https://datatracker.ie= tf.org/ipr/2808/). The
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 title of the
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 IPR disclosure is "Cisco Systems, Inc.'s Statement a= bout IPR related to
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions"


=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Thank you

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 IETF Secretariat

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 _______________________________________________
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 OSPF mailing list
 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 OSPF@ietf.= org <mailto:OSPF@= ietf.org>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf




--001a114e7322a8d4070535660b87-- From nobody Fri Jun 17 06:04:34 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietf.org Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86D3112D099; Fri, 17 Jun 2016 06:04:32 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.22.2 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20160617130432.19151.57627.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2016 06:04:32 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: ospf@ietf.org Subject: [OSPF] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3-09.txt X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2016 13:04:32 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Open Shortest Path First IGP of the IETF. Title : OSPFv3 over IPv4 for IPv6 Transition Authors : I. Chen A. Lindem R. Atkinson Filename : draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3-09.txt Pages : 10 Date : 2016-06-17 Abstract: This document defines a mechanism to use IPv4 to transport OSPFv3 packets. Using OSPFv3 over IPv4 with the existing OSPFv3 Address Family extension can simplify transition from an OSPFv2 IPv4-only routing domain to an OSPFv3 dual-stack routing domain. This document updates RFC 5838 to support virtual links in the IPv4 unicast address family when using OSPFv3 over IPv4. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3/ There's also a htmlized version available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3-09 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3-09 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Sat Jun 18 15:14:24 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B21D912DA28; Sat, 18 Jun 2016 15:14:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -15.947 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.947 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KhO2YmoyeT7c; Sat, 18 Jun 2016 15:14:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from aer-iport-2.cisco.com (aer-iport-2.cisco.com [173.38.203.52]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4A69212DA1B; Sat, 18 Jun 2016 15:06:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1714; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1466287594; x=1467497194; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=V6NOAkb98CVFIR4Do18k77v9np10XyfSYw9PZNEqdsM=; b=T9y3Ci+AVKghyAUMYhL10ScDDfkXX9dCL7cI8f9HAXRKa/YHfyFlwPu2 5eriyFZz41AKm8PofMxyMTJqqUVu3APXuKJxOuX70+5SybGa/tEaduD/T UWcUyYqzuc0C+yUFQevZ1aMj8cehkvHIzP8JRWJO2ve3zWtZIbs6kSRQg U=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0CsAgCoxGVX/xbLJq1dhBR9AbpmgXoih?= =?us-ascii?q?XUCgVcUAQEBAQEBAWUnhEwBAQQjFUABEAsUBAICBRYLAgIJAwIBAgFFBgEMAQc?= =?us-ascii?q?BAYgsDq9PkAwBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEcgQGFJoRNghCFMYJaAQSYd?= =?us-ascii?q?oYGiCSBaU6EBIhnj3ceNoNyOjOKRwEBAQ?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.26,489,1459814400"; d="scan'208";a="635245513" Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-1.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 18 Jun 2016 22:06:32 +0000 Received: from as-lnx.cisco.com (ams-asmirnov-nitro5.cisco.com [10.55.206.134]) (authenticated bits=0) by aer-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u5IM6V8n030290 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 18 Jun 2016 22:06:32 GMT Message-ID: <5765C5E7.1070107@cisco.com> Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2016 00:06:31 +0200 From: Anton Smirnov Organization: Cisco Systems User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Manav Bhatia , "" References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authenticated-User: asmirnov Archived-At: Cc: "rtg-dir@ietf.org" , draft-smirnov-ospf-xaf-te@tools.ietf.org, OSPF WG List Subject: Re: [OSPF] RtgDir review: draft-smirnov-ospf-xaf-te X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2016 22:14:24 -0000 Hi Manav, thanks for your review. I just published new revision of the draft addressing comments of the second Routing Directorate review (by Ice Wijnands). In brief, there is a mention of applicability to sub-LSPs of a Point-to-Multipoint LSP and rewritten example (hopefully, for better readability). Anton On 06/10/2016 06:56 AM, Manav Bhatia wrote: > Hello, > > I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft. > The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related > drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and > sometimes on special request. The purpose of the review is to provide > assistance to the Routing ADs. For more information about the Routing > Directorate, please see http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir > > Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, it > would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF > Last Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through > discussion or by updating the draft. > > Document: draft-smirnov-ospf-xaf-te > Reviewer: Manav Bhatia > Review Date: 10/06/2016 > IETF LC End Date: date-if-known > Intended Status: Standards Track > > Summary: No issues found. This document is ready for publication. > > The draft proposes something that prima facie appears reasonable -- > using a single OSPF instance to set up TE LSPs for both v4 and v6. > > Comments: > > The draft is quite simple and i see no technical issues. However, i > would like this to go through the regular IETF WG process before it gets > pushed to the publication pipeline. > > Cheers, Manav From nobody Mon Jun 20 04:25:09 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBC6312B065 for ; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 04:25:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -15.947 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.947 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NzWM5ZflK8Vo for ; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 04:25:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com [173.37.86.74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6AE7E12B013 for ; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 04:25:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=546; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1466421906; x=1467631506; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:content-id: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=KUwM8x34wLPDCN53Earg63m5gt/N4vntVf6sWr6Z1PQ=; b=b95R3AMX6FcjijQu8A8F7r1nKebr7eq8hoD4m7KcTOY/SYn/WBTcbQ5j sTdjctsB3fWYtgNlYDH4ecapvYbP9KBzN+otJYGB1iMP+8KO/jWoRnzWL Eeg1gBRe2+b8LVEFjx0ZSd2lXW0mdhF/9me0E54BHmWnFoQNrhsntfWsU 8=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0CCBQDQ0WdX/5tdJa1dgz6BUwa4UIQJh?= =?us-ascii?q?jWBEzsRAQEBAQEBAWUnhFIdBhFXASICJgIEMBUSBBOIMKAGj2KQFgEBCAIBJIE?= =?us-ascii?q?BkTSCWgWYdgGBMIx5gVMBFYRSiGePdgE0IINwbolJfwEBAQ?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.26,498,1459814400"; d="scan'208";a="120470547" Received: from rcdn-core-4.cisco.com ([173.37.93.155]) by rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 20 Jun 2016 11:25:05 +0000 Received: from XCH-RTP-012.cisco.com (xch-rtp-012.cisco.com [64.101.220.152]) by rcdn-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u5KBP5Px021603 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 11:25:05 GMT Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) by XCH-RTP-012.cisco.com (64.101.220.152) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 07:25:04 -0400 Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 07:25:04 -0400 From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" To: OSPF WG List Thread-Topic: Call for Agenda Items for IETF 96 Thread-Index: AQHRyuZkakxiDMNkg0WbQ9uYWu/PAA== Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 11:25:04 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.116.152.200] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <89FE76E5D0CBCF4092799CD9F7BE4128@emea.cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Subject: [OSPF] Call for Agenda Items for IETF 96 X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 11:25:08 -0000 SGkgRm9sa3MsDQoNCldlIGhhdmUgYSBwcmVsaW1pbmFyeSBhZ2VuZGEgc2xvdCBmb3IgSUVURiA5 NiBpbiBCZXJsaW4uIFRoaXMgSUVURiBvdXINCnNsb3QgZG9lc27igJl0IGhhdmUgdGhlIHBvdGVu dGlhbCBwYXJ0aWNpcGF0ZSBjb25mbGljdCB3ZSBoYWQgd2l0aCBJRVRGIDk1Lg0KSG93ZXZlciwg aXQgaXMgdGhlIGxhc3QgMi4wIGhvdXIgc2xvdCBvZiBJRVRGIDk2ICgxMEFNIC0gMTJQTSBvbiBG cmlkYXkNCk1vcm5pbmcpLiBIb3BlZnVsbHksIGV2ZXJ5b25lIGlzIHN0YXlpbmcgZm9yIHRoZSBl bnRpcmUgd2Vlay4NCg0KUGxlYXNlIHN1Ym1pdCBhbnkgcmVxdWVzdHMgZm9yIGEgc2xvdCB0byA8 b3NwZi1jaGFpcnNAaWV0Zi5vcmc+DQoNClRoYW5rcywNCkFjZWUgYW5kIEFiaGF5IA0KDQoNCg== From nobody Mon Jun 20 06:40:38 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEB5D12D610 for ; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 06:40:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -15.947 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.947 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NoPLqAV-ogj3 for ; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 06:40:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.86.72]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 685F912D0BF for ; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 06:40:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=556; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1466430018; x=1467639618; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:content-id: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=Av0dg1RRQesAqVW7cJOGSdl2mhyXnCQLdu0G1vfrH88=; b=er1e1J82nfqg6pnaw9T/1uTE5vxmIHRxysH7XVR2jc71CJoK6HZdCkiE XdkOF42rh+v9Q3hibbZ8GkWj6dbje7jyOCMHE1jcZZgkuLX2RnM+ybWGe Bzwx9BOrViIO60BPL3fNtUMsAyrBJPrKCDW/1K/QSAPF1fYVINLAueEll k=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0AnBQAV8WdX/51dJa1egz5WfQa6X4F6J?= =?us-ascii?q?IYRgRU5EwEBAQEBAQFlJ4RSIxFXASICJgIEMBUSBIhDDqBFj2KQGwEBAQcBAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAR0FgQGRNIJaBZh2AYYFiCSBUwEVhFKIZ4ZQiSYBIAEzg3BuAYlIfwEBAQ?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.26,498,1459814400"; d="scan'208";a="120616925" Received: from rcdn-core-6.cisco.com ([173.37.93.157]) by rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 20 Jun 2016 13:40:17 +0000 Received: from XCH-RTP-014.cisco.com (xch-rtp-014.cisco.com [64.101.220.154]) by rcdn-core-6.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u5KDeGEL018938 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 13:40:17 GMT Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) by XCH-RTP-014.cisco.com (64.101.220.154) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 09:40:16 -0400 Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 09:40:16 -0400 From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" To: OSPF WG List Thread-Topic: Working Group Last Call on IPR Update for OSPFv2 Segment Routing Extensions Thread-Index: AQHRyvlHudaI9o4tfk+AOCXXt5DCMA== Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 13:40:16 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.116.152.200] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Subject: [OSPF] Working Group Last Call on IPR Update for OSPFv2 Segment Routing Extensions X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 13:40:22 -0000 V2UgYXJlIGRvaW5nIGFuIGFkZGl0aW9uYWwgbGFzdCBXR0xDIGR1ZSBmb3IgdGhlIElQUiB1cGRh dGUgZm9yDQpodHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9pZC9kcmFmdC1pZXRmLW9zcGYtc2VnbWVudC1y b3V0aW5nLWV4dGVuc2lvbnMtMDgudHh0DQoNCkhlcmUgYXJlIGxpbmtzIHRvIHRoZSBwcmV2aW91 cyBhbmQgY3VycmVudCBJUFIgZGlzY2xvc3VyZXM6DQoNCiAgICBQcmV2aW91czogaHR0cHM6Ly9k YXRhdHJhY2tlci5pZXRmLm9yZy9pcHIvMjQwMS8NCiAgICBVcGRhdGVkOiBodHRwczovL2RhdGF0 cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3JnL2lwci8yODA4Lw0KDQpQbGVhc2Ugc2VuZCBhbnkgY29tbWVudHMgdG8g aGlzIGxpc3QgYmVmb3JlIFR1ZXNkYXkgSnVseSA1dGgsIDIwMTYuDQoNClRoYW5rcywNCkFjZWUg DQoNCg== From nobody Mon Jun 20 07:25:12 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 141F5127058 for ; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 07:25:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -15.947 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.947 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iDvze9FjknJQ for ; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 07:24:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from aer-iport-4.cisco.com (aer-iport-4.cisco.com [173.38.203.54]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB51E12D0DD for ; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 07:24:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=656; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1466432695; x=1467642295; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=RYPKEEzL+SiDp1RKiwsc3u6SXczU+x5QNFUN/1J7SS8=; b=ch3AWJNnUuo27g3boMNQ5Wdv6rwKP39pFSbAcX4WNs0bDLSytc30KhW8 rQ4eg6Gispk/epEXDbSMGJDstsgNk71mmZcdb+6i62llWGmQXCiMXyY6f bM4ATP4Xv09gxLx5ffUlyHZh95LCTDosWSx1kHPqmoc0yx5E5MBALqqqK U=; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.26,498,1459814400"; d="scan'208";a="638113606" Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-3.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 20 Jun 2016 14:24:54 +0000 Received: from [10.61.203.124] ([10.61.203.124]) by aer-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u5KEOrtf003629; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 14:24:53 GMT Message-ID: <5767FCDA.4060901@cisco.com> Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 16:25:30 +0200 From: Peter Psenak User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" , OSPF WG List References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [OSPF] Working Group Last Call on IPR Update for OSPFv2 Segment Routing Extensions X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 14:25:09 -0000 Support as coauthor. thanks, Peter On 6/20/16 15:40 , Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: > We are doing an additional last WGLC due for the IPR update for > https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions-08.txt > > Here are links to the previous and current IPR disclosures: > > Previous: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2401/ > Updated: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2808/ > > Please send any comments to his list before Tuesday July 5th, 2016. > > Thanks, > Acee > > _______________________________________________ > OSPF mailing list > OSPF@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf > . > From nobody Mon Jun 20 13:38:57 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFD7E12D9EE for ; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 13:38:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.7 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tsfd_IpXiDNZ for ; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 13:38:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lf0-x22e.google.com (mail-lf0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::22e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 392DA12D9F4 for ; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 13:38:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id f6so46286493lfg.0 for ; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 13:38:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=user-agent:date:subject:from:to:message-id:thread-topic:references :in-reply-to:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=r/Gqs+wSZ7eqN7kcL64yo9nRIL541nO2+tiDPVK4988=; b=ARCHepMe33yQt40RmDhNu277b4IibvSzKHeKJA0tvK5OIiKDwXIdf61aIFInATloyU Bgr4csRpszbkPcWO/qbFVecJm4UxVmFm4X+5bzbLMtzC+A+71luka2pHP1AHX/RYeulR DDtewOOaO5EUqF5NAmZ/x5oPr4Ko4Ai1Fz6sJiEnX2U4ZnmBIvTuZ9MWskMOPJ/OL+dM 3S9rQIMjuAmnnFNRecIqrVoyIxi5xfeNNVeiKrCD0FwgUtE3zLcV/uFDbkQajF63xoUC CPbSGusWSekaRJBgEBLOH+2yHs267xHnZc0YYB2d4+RJdsqNFx+j9nFyg6nmnvyyOFbz y5xA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:user-agent:date:subject:from:to:message-id :thread-topic:references:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=r/Gqs+wSZ7eqN7kcL64yo9nRIL541nO2+tiDPVK4988=; b=mP99mkBtbBNulUM5zH5MCFRHYekoqYqwJpTR0P77ibYBhii2RQH7lBa5wajuee2v+F o7DznJwIO25Kx1IaMjqWvUHwWPDEHidobY14OtBjZTIckp94ECC4/oEHdr3sSeONk4b+ NlLlzqogdJKY92aNZ/7LTMq0PhUyjy4TXyHDwaKd/Ks7qK9oTfH5y7hccYajDLHI8lfz m3WSSSjiBbhU825XLlsKMjMyMA31r7q0S0qPWkqzk9XgQdOieCVDWQzrt0VZt9nj3qig QlDOUE9Dk1WvHu/IMx/bolpsfFVQ/+vEBeTg5Tz5yMps8luB6KyDYKAqVNELo9KBNv7e FwYQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tIAzCpFYwZv+6l3fTLi/QE/CgTZg9K9KS8u+JyPxITvsqnsHkdInV5lhsJsY9h64A== X-Received: by 10.28.46.71 with SMTP id u68mr904055wmu.99.1466455133366; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 13:38:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.204] (94-43-130-14.dsl.utg.ge. [94.43.130.14]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t188sm4430003wma.8.2016.06.20.13.38.52 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 20 Jun 2016 13:38:52 -0700 (PDT) User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.16.0.160506 Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 00:38:48 +0400 From: Jeff Tantsura To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" , OSPF WG List Message-ID: <2903FD23-C00C-42CD-BB05-2E2C98A81FCA@gmail.com> Thread-Topic: [OSPF] Working Group Last Call on IPR Update for OSPFv2 Segment Routing Extensions References: <5767FCDA.4060901@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <5767FCDA.4060901@cisco.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [OSPF] Working Group Last Call on IPR Update for OSPFv2 Segment Routing Extensions X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 20:38:57 -0000 Acee, Support as co- author. Thanks, Jeff >On 6/20/16 15:40 , Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: >> We are doing an additional last WGLC due for the IPR update for >> https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions-08.txt >> >> Here are links to the previous and current IPR disclosures: >> >> Previous: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2401/ >> Updated: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2808/ >> >> Please send any comments to his list before Tuesday July 5th, 2016. >> >> Thanks, >> Acee >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OSPF mailing list >> OSPF@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf >> . >> > >_______________________________________________ >OSPF mailing list >OSPF@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf From nobody Mon Jun 20 13:42:08 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0BC312DA25 for ; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 13:42:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id X68YM7gL33d2 for ; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 13:42:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qk0-x230.google.com (mail-qk0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1346212DA29 for ; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 13:42:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk0-x230.google.com with SMTP id a186so178805949qkf.0 for ; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 13:42:05 -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; bh=Po4JRlCPQNqahbtsGYrn+6KWDuMC/nWPxqZFj0UW6zc=; b=PVMr+Ho7Xgun36nx8UaxEhZPBuF3rwW8rQAC+wSuaF1zYBHf4/F55Yx4q0sR09wdcA 0TVNtVL9C13DGkyns292FG404ZTn82isxI8dMpsoVjh7Q0nSt30pCV7pdOwHk8ZkTFW5 gj+md6+wBCLemjVtmK0XduGxjGyLZUlzS9iJ1ZFkRS5oZb+IHbw/wg1M8z2o0Ehh1Uma BK9aRaHYWamPCIjIbZhvUfuZzu7g0AgsQz3S3vrQDPrbImfvvrVLk/i0HW+YuaAORXQs 8mQyq1CsU+KreqO2NfzWia/tf+bUcxbKNOn0yaSY/z+DpHqDMeyY7D7qYEI3g5N9rzlw Layw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Po4JRlCPQNqahbtsGYrn+6KWDuMC/nWPxqZFj0UW6zc=; b=YHSYPxnkkeLtd9hASYY+alNM0oNRWnlvd6qNO+Xmrog6MbBpwntRYR+ubnG71I1lJP wtoFZiLXozCXktXCwLuFNG6La1MKAGHj+02i7jAZ5LxeojMLytm0iRVNUyLvVCwBqUa5 h3zkpCqUoRKL0Ot/L1s/O+HGR0GZSDe8EU1jasb19/FUtumKqvzzdfRMTmnCkngGf6Ca 2nnYyeTNJo46mau9yS8NGU28X5+bVklBtFDHqgFaQdL8ZikZdcUN0e/C9dXC7VxjwaDM nMOsnVGVtWNKeLq3dtj77shp1W6qJBO3s3SFi8UQcbB1hCTZx30WZHdcFnhYzEIdD3Db pFzA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tJF0g36d8DXF1igD3AHxoDqqq+144PAXRq6B55H+dhqxYQy2lLQ/6AE/0NyE8/Q6XSAa/YdzfLT8YV/hA== X-Received: by 10.233.237.14 with SMTP id c14mr23726904qkg.88.1466455324233; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 13:42:04 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.200.57.81 with HTTP; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 13:42:03 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <2903FD23-C00C-42CD-BB05-2E2C98A81FCA@gmail.com> References: <5767FCDA.4060901@cisco.com> <2903FD23-C00C-42CD-BB05-2E2C98A81FCA@gmail.com> From: Alia Atlas Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 16:42:03 -0400 Message-ID: To: Jeff Tantsura Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c0c0a06ae14130535bbbc4b Archived-At: Cc: OSPF WG List Subject: Re: [OSPF] Working Group Last Call on IPR Update for OSPFv2 Segment Routing Extensions X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 20:42:06 -0000 --94eb2c0c0a06ae14130535bbbc4b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 To be clear, this is a repeat WG Last Call due to additional IPR declared after the WGLC by a co-author. If anyone has concerns as a result about the work progressing, please state that. Otherwise, we know that the WG was previously supportive. Regards, Alia On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 4:38 PM, Jeff Tantsura wrote: > Acee, > > Support as co- author. > > Thanks, > Jeff > > >On 6/20/16 15:40 , Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: > >> We are doing an additional last WGLC due for the IPR update for > >> > https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions-08.txt > >> > >> Here are links to the previous and current IPR disclosures: > >> > >> Previous: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2401/ > >> Updated: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2808/ > >> > >> Please send any comments to his list before Tuesday July 5th, 2016. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Acee > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> OSPF mailing list > >> OSPF@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf > >> . > >> > > > >_______________________________________________ > >OSPF mailing list > >OSPF@ietf.org > >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf > > > _______________________________________________ > OSPF mailing list > OSPF@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf > --94eb2c0c0a06ae14130535bbbc4b Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
To be clear, this is a repeat WG Last Call due to addition= al IPR declared after
the WGLC by a co-author.

If anyone has concerns as a result about the work progressing, please stat= e that.
Otherwise, we know that the WG was previously supportive.=

Regards,
Alia

On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 4:38 PM= , Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
Acee,

Support as co- author.

Thanks,
Jeff

>On 6/20/16 15:40 , Acee Lindem (acee) wrote:
>> We are doing an additional last WGLC due for the IPR update for >> https://www.ietf.o= rg/id/draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions-08.txt
>>
>> Here are links to the previous and current IPR disclosures:
>>
>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Previous: https://datatracker.iet= f.org/ipr/2401/
>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Updated: https://datatracker.ietf= .org/ipr/2808/
>>
>> Please send any comments to his list before Tuesday July 5th, 2016= .
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Acee
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OSPF mailing list
>> OSPF@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf >> .
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>OSPF mailing list
>OSPF@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf


_______________________________________________
OSPF mailing list
OSPF@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf

--94eb2c0c0a06ae14130535bbbc4b-- From nobody Mon Jun 20 17:23:00 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietf.org Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5162B12DAB9; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 17:22:59 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: IETF Secretariat To: X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.23.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20160621002259.30084.89176.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 17:22:59 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: ospf@ietf.org, ipr-announce@ietf.org Subject: [OSPF] IPR Disclosure Cisco Systems, Inc.'s Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 00:22:59 -0000 Dear Rob Shakir, Hannes Gredler, Peter Psenak, Stefano Previdi, Clarence Filsfils, Wim Henderickx, Jeff Tantsura: An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled "OSPFv3 Extensions for Segment Routing" (draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions) was submitted to the IETF Secretariat on and has been posted on the "IETF Page of Intellectual Property Rights Disclosures" (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2812/). The title of the IPR disclosure is "Cisco Systems, Inc.'s Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions" Thank you IETF Secretariat From nobody Tue Jun 21 09:55:40 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CE7B12DB02; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:55:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.002 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=metaswitch.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oBHOegEYtwKR; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:55:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bl2on0118.outbound.protection.outlook.com [65.55.169.118]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6778C12DB03; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:55:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=metaswitch.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=CRKCQy2pb9Dgz/0OtScTD/FvgYnAKKnqO5UxAT3z6dc=; b=ZN6w9vClzj3sJXoD9MKTmx33t3R1G7RIqHMDqupDGm0t0Va8UOq6sFHm6u2RSQW+vuZMBlrjr7Ty9iYwS8ykeCrq0IGDJezNobh74xcGJIdXA2/jxQ/FJ4P+vN9vp15KH2hFZVy6sBrf62ItXzWCERMhh64gYAnIZITrePwMN5s= Received: from SN1PR0201MB1807.namprd02.prod.outlook.com (10.162.228.27) by SN1PR0201MB1807.namprd02.prod.outlook.com (10.162.228.27) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.523.12; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 16:55:32 +0000 Received: from SN1PR0201MB1807.namprd02.prod.outlook.com ([10.162.228.27]) by SN1PR0201MB1807.namprd02.prod.outlook.com ([10.162.228.27]) with mapi id 15.01.0523.015; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 16:55:32 +0000 From: Alan Davey To: "Derek Man-Kit Yeung (myeung)" , "draft-ietf-ospf-yang@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: draft-ietf-ospf-yang-03 questions and doubts Thread-Index: AdE3NLGjjtMGuql0QfiSt+s9ulh9zgoPjYmAAiVQNuADX5obgAcESYLgDpFuDLA= Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 16:55:32 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=Alan.Davey@metaswitch.com; x-originating-ip: [2620:104:4001:72:886:d2e1:eac:ae71] x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: f1fe2002-7262-44fc-7b19-08d399f4dbd2 x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; SN1PR0201MB1807; 6:BwfP9TitTL6W3EgnILwE5EVTxyf+wHYX85uo2Xblvp2ABJFKb+Ht2MShbnBDml86/V9ej+17SzXsxvyztKhIGxda3YnHkdigxY5MCPldk92reOH/iMWhpfxog9ZEbqtndSySDxu9V63AWZSK7xajYXa2qr3muYnGovJmRJeCF3iUoeeDJPqACkh5V/LdZu4M+tZAvuAVipItayZJ/kx09Ymtf4qeWlwQCo1dPffZBw+HTSyIUg9lZcj8hTKEHSG3lan3YMOci+rTzk5FHa76dMfd1sTMppCxZs6Ht/ufmzQ=; 5:lTsJLKYoIBAOgjw00xWFDGYuJgSggRLK2aALgc6P6UNNY6fOZrWH/UvJNjoh/IRLyd/pFtlp3DrCbxkCy10Wbow0dhC1yJOkWmKWtZOgO9fRzGwTdd6LLuztwHXSARZ6c/BPHbkrooh23C1FWVkCsQ==; 24:IfEKOdwMX5dTKjQ58fhssns72Zdd+xcrZrK7CVBSZzANnMvwVC7wJAyeCos4q0nat21lbw9lFU8ych8RjFF+xGDmyxtGHpALwCdqgbh6xAM=; 7:imhEqRczXsUVKKZXQNSdK4SgfbbaeY4727LJEF7WuTZ6sFioahDnsTumsXomiPbJVamLSIpY6JxwBGoNgnZ2pQ+hF9r83LeYXZY4DFjmIygAAijYREjPmTdxBhkUHdjwpEgWgKx7rH53PizkCRX7lEfBbrRXUWLFLdPMn9mnLHlXcR0vSV3yu5U//rx3b6MAkxfqF7iM13woh49cCuVo0Zf3ag0NaDiB7TKXte/hIF3gDQJjr99r1HGvTt/ECfAV x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:SN1PR0201MB1807; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(95692535739014)(21748063052155); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(10201501046)(3002001); SRVR:SN1PR0201MB1807; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:SN1PR0201MB1807; x-forefront-prvs: 098076C36C x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(7916002)(51914003)(51444003)(43544003)(377454003)(189002)(199003)(7736002)(5003600100003)(7696003)(7846002)(3660700001)(4326007)(345774005)(19625215002)(99286002)(2906002)(189998001)(122556002)(74316001)(97736004)(19580395003)(3900700001)(2501003)(19580405001)(5002640100001)(50986999)(76176999)(101416001)(586003)(3280700002)(33656002)(16236675004)(790700001)(6116002)(102836003)(54356999)(19300405004)(11100500001)(5001770100001)(230783001)(86362001)(87936001)(77096005)(2950100001)(8676002)(2900100001)(81156014)(5890100001)(15975445007)(92566002)(8936002)(93886004)(76576001)(106356001)(105586002)(81166006)(9686002)(68736007)(10400500002)(3826002)(579004); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:SN1PR0201MB1807; H:SN1PR0201MB1807.namprd02.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: metaswitch.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_SN1PR0201MB180776177276613412A5EE02F92B0SN1PR0201MB1807_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: metaswitch.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 21 Jun 2016 16:55:32.6744 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 9d9e56eb-f613-4ddb-b27b-bfcdf14b2cdb X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SN1PR0201MB1807 Archived-At: Cc: OSPF WG List Subject: Re: [OSPF] draft-ietf-ospf-yang-03 questions and doubts X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 16:55:39 -0000 --_000_SN1PR0201MB180776177276613412A5EE02F92B0SN1PR0201MB1807_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Derek Did you have any thoughts on my email below? I have not seen any response. Thanks Alan From: Alan Davey Sent: 12 April 2016 07:58 To: 'Derek Man-Kit Yeung (myeung)' ; draft-ietf-ospf-yang= @ietf.org Cc: OSPF WG List Subject: RE: draft-ietf-ospf-yang-03 questions and doubts Hi Derek Thanks for your email, apologies for the delay in getting back to you. I h= ave followed up on a couple of points from our email exchange. Please let = me know your thoughts on the following. On the subject of separate containers for OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 interfaces, con= ditional statements add complexity. My analogy here is writing program code. In a similar situation, to suppor= t OSPFv2 and OSPFv3, I would have different top level functions for the two= versions and then call common functions where possible. This gives a stra= ightforward top-level with no conditional statements; simpler to write and = easier to read and understand. Therefore, I think that a simpler definition would follow from having versi= on-specific top level containers which then include common and version-spec= ific common definitions. In interface-common-operation, I think that the DR and BDR information is p= rovided to show the DR or BDR for a link as identified by the protocol. Th= erefore, for OSPFv3, this identification consists of the Router ID plus the= interface ID. Note the following. - On the use of interface ID, as per RFC 5340, this is used in OSP= Fv3 to uniquely identify (among its own interfaces) the DR's interface to t= he link. (Recall that a router may have multiple interfaces to the link.) - Using the link-local IPv6 address may not be the most user-frien= dly way of identifying the link. The link-local address is normally auto-g= enerated by the system, not assigned by the user, and therefore the user is= likely to have to search the system configuration to identify the link to = which it is associated. - The leaf bdr-ip-addr still has "type inet:ipv4-address" in versi= on 04 of the draft. Regards Alan Davey From: Derek Man-Kit Yeung (myeung) [mailto:myeung@cisco.com] Sent: 03 March 2016 21:55 To: Alan Davey = >; draft-ietf-ospf-yang@ietf.org Cc: OSPF WG List > Subject: Re: draft-ietf-ospf-yang-03 questions and doubts Hi Alan, Please see DY> below. From: Alan Davey > Date: Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 3:28 AM To: myeung >, "draft-ietf-ospf-ya= ng@ietf.org" > Cc: OSPF WG List > Subject: RE: draft-ietf-ospf-yang-03 questions and doubts Hi Derek Thank you for your response, and apologies for the delay in getting back to= you. Have you considered distinct ospfv3-interface-operation and ospfv2-i= nterface-operation? Or even distinct "container ospfv2" and "container osp= fv3"? DY> No, we do not plan to have explicit ospfv2 and ospfv3 container. We use= d when statement or if-feature to take care of OSPFv2 vs OSPFv3 specific fi= elds in general. There are a number of differences between the Interface Data Structure defi= ned in RFC2328 and in RFC5340. In particular, the following. Do you plan = to add all of these differences to the interface-operation grouping? - DR and BDR identification. o As you wrote, section 9 of RFC2328 specifies that the Interface Data St= ructure includes the Router ID and IP address for the DR and BDR. o Section 4.1.2 of RFC5340 does not specify how to identify the DR and BD= R, but given the OSPFv3 protocol, it seems reasonable that the router ID an= d interface ID would be stored. DY> In OSPFv3, the DR/BDR is still identified by a router ID. The interface= ID of the DR is used when generating LSA and by itself do not identify the= DR/BDR. DY> Given the DR/BDR router ID/ip address, one can locate the corresponding= neighbor information and find the interface ID there. DY> So we are not going the duplicate the interface ID of the DR in the int= erface container again. - Section 4.1.2 of RFC5340 specifies a number of objects that do n= ot appear in the RFC2328 version of the Interface Data Structure, as follow= s. o Interface ID. o Instance ID. DY> The two above will be added. It is missing now. To be clear. It is the = interface ID of the local router, not the one of the DR, for the interface= . o List of LSAs with link-local scope. DY> The model already have link-local LSA database. o List of IPv6 prefixes configured for the attached link. DY> Understood that it is mentioned in the OSPFv3 RFC. DY> However, looking at a few implementations there is no explicit display = of such information with the interface related OSPF show command. DY> The IPv6 prefixes (or IPv4 prefix in OSPFv2) advertised by the router c= ould be found already either from the interface module (IPv4/IPv6 augment) = or from the LSA database itself. DY> Extracting it again in OSPF model interface operation data seems redund= ant. DY> We don't think we need it in the base model, but vendors could augment = it if they find it useful. Thanks, - Derek Regards Alan From: Derek Man-Kit Yeung (myeung) [mailto:myeung@cisco.com] Sent: 04 February 2016 19:39 To: Alan Davey = >; draft-ietf-ospf-yang@ietf.org Cc: ospf@ietf.org Subject: Re: draft-ietf-ospf-yang-03 questions and doubts Hi Alan, Thanks for the comments. As you have pointed out, there are OSPFv3 specific fields missing in the mo= del now. For example, instance ID and interface ID. We will add them in the= next update. As for the DR, DR is conceptually one of the neighbor. In OSPFv2, the DR's router ID and IP address are used in protocol operation= . While in OSPFv3, the DR's router ID and interface ID are used in protocol o= peration. According to OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 RFC, the interface structure should keep bot= h the DR's router ID and IP address. We have the following in the current model. grouping interface-operation { leaf dr { type inet:ipv4-address; description "Designated Router (DR) IP address."; } } grouping neighbor-operation { leaf dr { type yang:dotted-quad; description "Designated Router."; } } To better match the RFC and accommodate both OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 in a cleaner= way, we plan to make the following changes. grouping interface-operation { leaf dr-router-id { type yang:dotted-quad; description "Designated Router (DR) router ID."; } leaf dr-ip-address { type inet:ip-address; description "Designated Router (DR) IP address."; } } grouping neighbor-operation { leaf dr-router-id { type yang:dotted-quad; description "Neighbor's Designated Router (DR) router ID."; } leaf dr-ip-address { type inet:ip-address; description "Neighbor's Designated Router (DR) IP address."; } } If one need the DR's interface ID in the OSPFv3 case, it could be found by = locating the neighbor entry for the DR and get the interface ID (To be adde= d) field there. Comments welcome. Thanks, - Derek From: Alan Davey > Date: Tuesday, December 15, 2015 8:23 AM To: "draft-ietf-ospf-yang@ietf.org" <= draft-ietf-ospf-yang@ietf.org> Cc: "ospf@ietf.org" > Subject: draft-ietf-ospf-yang-03 questions and doubts Folks I have a doubt about draft-ietf-ospf-yang-03. Please let me know your thou= ghts on the following. The text is OSPFv2-specific in places. I think that it would be better to = define separate top-level groupings and containers for OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 an= d define common groupings and containers, where possible, that are used by = both. For example, grouping interface-operation contains the following, which is = incorrect for OSPFv3. - leaf dr with type ipv4-address - leaf bdr with type ipv4-address. I think that it would be better to define something along the following lin= es. - ospfv3-interface-operation { o uses interface-config o uses ospf-common-interface-operation o leaf dr { ? type if:interface-ref ? description: * "The remote interface ID used by the Designated Router = on * this link. This is the interface index of the interfac= e local to the DR."; o etc - ospfv2-interface-operation { o uses interface-config o uses ospf-common-interface-operation o leaf dr { ? type inet:ipv4-address; ? description "Designated Router (DR) IP address."; o etc. Regards Alan Davey --_000_SN1PR0201MB180776177276613412A5EE02F92B0SN1PR0201MB1807_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Derek

 

Did you have any thoug= hts on my email below?  I have not seen any response.

 

Thanks

Alan=

 

From: Alan Davey
Sent: 12 April 2016 07:58
To: 'Derek Man-Kit Yeung (myeung)' <myeung@cisco.com>; draft-i= etf-ospf-yang@ietf.org
Cc: OSPF WG List <ospf@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: draft-ietf-ospf-yang-03 questions and doubts=

 

Hi Derek

 

Thanks for your email,= apologies for the delay in getting back to you.  I have followed up o= n a couple of points from our email exchange.  Please let me know your= thoughts on the following.

 

On the subject of sepa= rate containers for OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 interfaces, conditional statements ad= d complexity. 

 

My analogy here is wri= ting program code.  In a similar situation, to support OSPFv2 and OSPF= v3, I would have different top level functions for the two versions and the= n call common functions where possible.  This gives a straightforward top-level with no conditional statements; sim= pler to write and easier to read and understand.

 

Therefore, I think tha= t a simpler definition would follow from having version-specific top level = containers which then include common and version-specific common definition= s.

 

In interface-common-op= eration, I think that the DR and BDR information is provided to show the DR= or BDR for a link as identified by the protocol.  Therefore, for OSPF= v3, this identification consists of the Router ID plus the interface ID.  Note the following.

 

-&n= bsp;         On the use of = interface ID, as per RFC 5340, this is used in OSPFv3 to uniquely identify = (among its own interfaces) the DR’s interface to the link.  (Rec= all that a router may have multiple interfaces to the link.)

-&n= bsp;         Using the link= -local IPv6 address may not be the most user-friendly way of identifying th= e link.  The link-local address is normally auto-generated by the syst= em, not assigned by the user, and therefore the user is likely to have to search the system configuration to identify = the link to which it is associated.

-&n= bsp;         The leaf bdr-i= p-addr still has “type inet:ipv4-address” in version 04 of the = draft.

 

Regards

Alan Davey<= /span>

 

 

Hi Alan= ,

&n= bsp;

Please = see DY> below.

&n= bsp;

From: Alan Davey <Alan.Davey@metaswitch.com&g= t;
Date: Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 3:28 AM
To: myeung <myeung@cis= co.com>, "draft-ietf-ospf-yang@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ospf-yang@ietf.org><= br> Cc: OSPF WG List <ospf@ie= tf.org>
Subject: RE: draft-ietf-ospf-yang-03 questions and doubts=

&n= bsp;

Hi Derek

 

Thank you for your res= ponse, and apologies for the delay in getting back to you.  Have you c= onsidered distinct ospfv3-interface-operation and ospfv2-interface-operatio= n?  Or even distinct “container ospfv2” and “container ospfv3”?

 

DY> No, we do not plan to have explicit ospfv2 and o= spfv3 container. We used when statement or if-feature to take care of OSPFv= 2 vs OSPFv3 specific fields in general.

 

There are a number of = differences between the Interface Data Structure defined in RFC2328 and in = RFC5340.  In particular, the following.  Do you plan to add all o= f these differences to the interface-operation grouping?

 

-&nbs= p;         DR and BDR ide= ntification.

o   As you wrote, = section 9 of RFC2328 specifies that the Interface Data Structure includes t= he Router ID and IP address for the DR and BDR.

o   Section 4.1.2 = of RFC5340 does not specify how to identify the DR and BDR, but given the O= SPFv3 protocol, it seems reasonable that the router ID and interface ID wou= ld be stored.

 

DY> In OSPFv3, the DR/BDR is still identified by a r= outer ID. The interface ID of the DR is used when generating LSA and by its= elf do not identify the DR/BDR.

DY> Given the DR/BDR router ID/ip address, one can l= ocate the corresponding neighbor information and find the interface ID ther= e.

DY> So we are not going the duplicate the interface = ID of the DR in the interface container again.

 

-&nbs= p;         Section 4.1.2 = of RFC5340 specifies a number of objects that do not appear in the RFC2328 = version of the Interface Data Structure, as follows.

o   Interface ID.<= /span>

o   Instance ID.

 

DY> The two above will be added. It is missing now. = To be clear. It is the interface ID of the local router, not the one of the= DR,  for the interface.

 

o   List of LSAs w= ith link-local scope.<= /p>

 

DY> The model already have link-local LSA database.<= o:p>

 

o   List of IPv6 p= refixes configured for the attached link.

 

DY> Understood that it is mentioned in the OSPFv3 RF= C. 

DY> However, looking at a few implementations there = is no explicit display of such information with the interface related OSPF = show command.

DY> The IPv6 prefixes (or IPv4 prefix in OSPFv2) adv= ertised by the router could be found already either from the interface modu= le (IPv4/IPv6 augment) or from the LSA database itself.

DY> Extracting it again in OSPF model interface oper= ation data seems redundant.

DY> We don’t think we need it in the base mode= l, but vendors could augment it if they find it useful.

 

Thanks,

- Derek

 

Regards

Alan

 

From: Derek Man-Kit Yeung (myeung) [mailto:myeung@cisco.com]
Sent: 04 February 2016 19:39
To: Alan Davey <Alan.Davey@met= aswitch.com>; draft-ietf-ospf-yang@ietf.org= <= br> Cc: ospf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: draft-ietf-ospf-yang-03 questions and doubts

 =

Hi Alan= ,

 <= /span>

Thanks = for the comments.

As you = have pointed out, there are OSPFv3 specific fields missing in the model now= . For example, instance ID and interface ID. We will add them in the next u= pdate.

 <= /span>

As for = the DR, DR is conceptually one of the neighbor. 

In OSPF= v2, the DR's router ID and IP address are used in protocol operation.

While i= n OSPFv3, the DR's router ID and interface ID are used in protocol operatio= n.

Accordi= ng to OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 RFC, the interface structure should keep both the D= R's router ID and IP address.=

 <= /span>

We have= the following in the current model.

 <= /span>

  = grouping interface-operation {

  =   leaf dr {

  =     type inet:ipv4-address;

  =     description "Designated Router (DR) IP address.";

  =   }

  = }

  = grouping neighbor-operation {=

  =   leaf dr {

  =     type yang:dotted-quad;

  =     description

  =       "Designated Router.";

  =   }

  = }

 <= /span>

To bett= er match the RFC and accommodate both OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 in a cleaner way, w= e plan to make the following changes.

 <= /span>

  = grouping interface-operation {

  =   leaf dr-router-id {

  =     type yang:dotted-quad;

  =     description

  =       "Designated Router (DR) router ID.";<= span style=3D"color:black">

  =   }

  =   leaf dr-ip-address {

  =     type inet:ip-address;=

  =     description "Designated Router (DR) IP address.";

  =   }

  = }

  = grouping neighbor-operation {=

  =   leaf dr-router-id {

  =     type yang:dotted-quad;

  =     description

  =       "Neighbor's Designated Router (DR) router ID.&quo= t;;

  =   }

  =   leaf dr-ip-address {

  =     type inet:ip-address;=

  =     description "Neighbor's Designated Router (DR) IP addres= s.";

  =   }

  = }

 <= /span>

If one = need the DR's interface ID in the OSPFv3 case, it could be found by locatin= g the neighbor entry for the DR and get the interface ID (To be added) fiel= d there.

 <= /span>

Comment= s welcome.

 <= /span>

Thanks,=

- Derek=

 <= /span>

From: Alan Davey <Alan.Davey@metaswitch.com&g= t;
Date: Tuesday, December 15, 2015 8:23 AM
To: "dr= aft-ietf-ospf-yang@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ospf-yang@iet= f.org>
Cc: "ospf@ietf.org<= span style=3D"color:black">" <ospf@ietf.org>
Subject: draft-ietf-ospf-yang-03 questions and doubts

 <= /span>

Folks<= /p>

 =

I have a doubt about dra= ft-ietf-ospf-yang-03.  Please let me know your thoughts on the followi= ng.

 =

The text is OSPFv2-speci= fic in places.  I think that it would be better to define separate top= -level groupings and containers for OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 and define common gro= upings and containers, where possible, that are used by both.

 =

For example, grouping in= terface-operation contains the following, which is incorrect for OSPFv3.

 =

-&nbs= p;         leaf dr with typ= e ipv4-address

-&nbs= p;         leaf bdr with ty= pe ipv4-address.

 

I think that it would be= better to define something along the following lines.

 =

-&nbs= p;         ospfv3-interface= -operation {

o   uses interface-c= onfig

o   uses ospf-common= -interface-operation

o   leaf dr {

§  type if:interfac= e-ref

§  description:

·           &nbs= p;       "The remote interface ID u= sed by the Designated Router on

·           &nbs= p;       this link.  This is the in= terface index of the interface local to the DR.";

o   etc

-&nbs= p;         ospfv2-interface= -operation {

o   uses interface-c= onfig

o   uses ospf-common= -interface-operation

o   leaf dr {

§    &nbs= p;      type inet:ipv4-address;

§    &nbs= p;      description "Designated Router (= DR) IP address.";

o   etc.<= /span>

 =

Regards

Alan Davey

 =

--_000_SN1PR0201MB180776177276613412A5EE02F92B0SN1PR0201MB1807_-- From nobody Thu Jun 23 08:35:10 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7D1B12D1D5; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 08:34:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.22 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.22 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mxhfWplMXXci; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 08:34:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from usplmg20.ericsson.net (usplmg20.ericsson.net [198.24.6.45]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ADE6512D1D1; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 08:34:51 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: c618062d-f79886d000002334-dd-576bf79baac2 Received: from EUSAAHC008.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [147.117.188.96]) by usplmg20.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 80.7B.09012.B97FB675; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 16:52:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EUSAAMB105.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.122]) by EUSAAHC008.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.96]) with mapi id 14.03.0294.000; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 11:34:20 -0400 From: David Allan I To: "pim@ietf.org" , "spring@ietf.org" , "isis-wg@ietf.org list (isis-wg@ietf.org)" , "ospf@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Computed multicast for SPRING Thread-Index: AdHNYvY29SUhPXzFRJC1ciwPb7brLA== Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 15:34:20 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [147.117.188.11] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_E6C17D2345AC7A45B7D054D407AA205C4BD26118eusaamb105erics_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFvrMLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyuXRPgu6c79nhBp9+slscPfSe1aLl3j12 iy8PbzJbHL/wm9GBxWPJkp9MAYxRXDYpqTmZZalF+nYJXBnXJnxhLtijVHF0ext7A+NZuS5G Tg4JAROJd9/uM0PYYhIX7q1n62Lk4hASOMoosfnMBjaQhJDAckaJvt0OIDabgIHEnv9fGEFs EYFVjBJ/ev1AbGEBNYnWs7NYuxg5gOLaEscO1EOU6ElsavsNNp9FQFXi9rInYDavgK/Ejac9 LCA2I9De76fWMIHYzALiEreezGeCuEdAYsme81C3iUq8fPyPFcJWkvj4ez47RH2+xJNti6Bm CkqcnPmEZQKj0Cwko2YhKZuFpAwiriOxYPcnNghbW2LZwtfMMPaZA4+ZkMUXMLKvYuQoLS7I yU03MtjECIyKYxJsujsY70/3PMQowMGoxMOrcCkrXIg1say4MvcQowQHs5II744/2eFCvCmJ lVWpRfnxRaU5qcWHGKU5WJTEecUeKYYLCaQnlqRmp6YWpBbBZJk4OKUaGBN1hC9IO0/r0Dq5 1FXdr2mirtXSZ2Eexx5OfcOz+aZ3tbPwFuWkW+WvPqYG8L75m7Ys/odABWd9p8KsZfc2PF64 c+6jC+kp721XFcwVtrN+MPXSixKtZv1Ds/daFnz9ftK0t3TlO6k3hbubrz7b3CDze/fH5cJ9 9yundcbtzT6wud5KQo7l3mYlluKMREMt5qLiRADHD7KEhgIAAA== Archived-At: Subject: [OSPF] Computed multicast for SPRING X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 15:34:54 -0000 --_000_E6C17D2345AC7A45B7D054D407AA205C4BD26118eusaamb105erics_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi PIM, SPRING, OSPF, ISIS FYI, We've posted an update to the framework draft, as well as OSPF and ISI= S drafts. This documents the approach and changes required to implement mul= ticast as a hybrid of unicast tunnels and replication points in a SPRING-MP= LS network. In this approach the multicast trees and the resulting FIB are= derived entirely from information in the IGP. At this point, this constitutes a complete proposal that can be critiqued i= n its entirety. We'd welcome folks to read it though and welcome comments a= nd questions... The drafts of interest are: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-allan-spring-mpls-multicast-framewor= k/ https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-allan-isis-spring-multicast/ https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-allan-ospf-spring-multicast/ Cheers! --_000_E6C17D2345AC7A45B7D054D407AA205C4BD26118eusaamb105erics_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi PIM, SPRING, OSPF, ISIS

 

FYI, We’ve posted an update to the framework d= raft, as well as OSPF and ISIS drafts. This documents the approach and chan= ges required to implement multicast as a hybrid of unicast tunnels and repl= ication points in a SPRING-MPLS network. In this approach the multicast trees and the resulting FIB  are deriv= ed entirely from information in the IGP.

 

At this point, this constitutes a complete proposal = that can be critiqued in its entirety. We’d welcome folks to read it = though and welcome comments and questions…

 

The drafts of interest are:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draf= t-allan-spring-mpls-multicast-framework/

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-allan-is= is-spring-multicast/

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-allan-os= pf-spring-multicast/

 

Cheers!

--_000_E6C17D2345AC7A45B7D054D407AA205C4BD26118eusaamb105erics_-- From nobody Fri Jun 24 09:04:03 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietf.org Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6A8712DCA8; Fri, 24 Jun 2016 09:00:45 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "\"IETF Secretariat\"" To: , X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.24.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20160624160045.10933.44482.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 09:00:45 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: ospf@ietf.org Subject: [OSPF] ospf - Requested session has been scheduled for IETF 96 X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 16:00:48 -0000 Dear Acee Lindem, The session(s) that you have requested have been scheduled. Below is the scheduled session information followed by the original request. ospf Session 1 (2:00:00) Friday, Morning Session I 1000-1200 Room Name: Potsdam II size: 175 --------------------------------------------- Request Information: --------------------------------------------------------- Working Group Name: Open Shortest Path First IGP Area Name: Routing Area Session Requester: Acee Lindem Number of Sessions: 1 Length of Session(s): 2 Hours Number of Attendees: 50 Conflicts to Avoid: First Priority: idr bess isis rtgwg rtgarea spring bier pim netmod Second Priority: teas mboned Special Requests: --------------------------------------------------------- From nobody Fri Jun 24 23:00:25 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF4B112D7A9 for ; Fri, 24 Jun 2016 23:00:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.325 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.325 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PVbK06bc5cVE for ; Fri, 24 Jun 2016 23:00:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cappuccino.rob.sh (cappuccino.rob.sh [IPv6:2a03:9800:10:4c::cafe:b00c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E05012D616 for ; Fri, 24 Jun 2016 23:00:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [2602:4b:a27f:3000:e110:c5bb:9cd9:7540] (helo=piccolo.rob.sh.mail) by cappuccino.rob.sh with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1bGgdN-0001RJ-64; Sat, 25 Jun 2016 07:00:01 +0100 Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 00:00:15 -0600 From: Rob Shakir To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" , OSPF WG List Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Airmail Beta (364) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="576e1def_62263fb0_11373" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [OSPF] Working Group Last Call on IPR Update for OSPFv2 Segment Routing Extensions X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 06:00:25 -0000 --576e1def_62263fb0_11373 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Also support as a co-author. r. On 20 June 2016 at 07:41:00, Acee Lindem (acee) (acee@cisco.com) wrote: We are doing an additional last WGLC due for the IPR update for https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions-08.txt Here are links to the previous and current IPR disclosures: Previous: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2401/ Updated: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2808/ Please send any comments to his list before Tuesday July 5th, 2016. Thanks, Acee _______________________________________________ OSPF mailing list OSPF@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf --576e1def_62263fb0_11373 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline