Hi Acee,

Understood.  Having sinned once is not an excuse for repetition.

Cheers,
Tony


> On Aug 5, 2026, at 9:22 AM, Acee Lindem - acee.ietf at gmail.com 
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> John, Tony, 
> 
> You realize this ship has sailed some time ago...
> 
>    https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc8668/
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Acee
> 
>> On Aug 5, 2026, at 12:11 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> 
>> I agree with Tony - this is an IQ test and we don’t want to fail.
>> 
>> John
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>> On Aug 5, 2026, at 12:03 PM, Tony Li <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> I would like to renew my objection: L2 bundle members should not be 
>>> enumerated.  This defeats the purpose of abstraction.
>>> 
>>> Tony
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Aug 5, 2026, at 8:54 AM, Acee Lindem via Datatracker - noreply at 
>>>> ietf.org <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> This message starts a WG Last Call for:
>>>> draft-ietf-lsr-l2-bundle-member-remote-id-03
>>>> 
>>>> This Working Group Last Call ends on 2026-08-19
>>>> 
>>>> Abstract:
>>>> In networks where Layer 2 (L2) interface bundles (such as a Link
>>>> Aggregation Group (LAG) as defined in IEEE 802.1AX) are deployed, a
>>>> controller may need to collect the connectivity relationships between
>>>> bundle members for traffic engineering (TE) purposes.  For example,
>>>> when performing topology management and bidirectional path
>>>> computation for TE, it is essential to know the connectivity
>>>> relationships among bundle members.
>>>> 
>>>> This document describes how OSPF and IS-IS would advertise the remote
>>>> interface identifiers for Layer 2 bundle members.  The corresponding
>>>> extension of BGP-LS is also specified.
>>>> 
>>>> File can be retrieved from:
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-lsr-l2-bundle-member-remote-id-03.txt
>>>> 
>>>> Please review and indicate your support or objection to proceed with the
>>>> publication of this document by replying to this email keeping [email protected]
>>>> in copy. Objections should be explained and suggestions to resolve them are
>>>> highly appreciated.
>>>> 
>>>> Authors, and WG participants in general, are reminded of the Intellectual
>>>> Property Rights (IPR) disclosure obligations described in BCP 79 [1].
>>>> Appropriate IPR disclosures required for full conformance with the 
>>>> provisions
>>>> of BCP 78 [1] and BCP 79 [2] must be filed, if you are aware of any.
>>>> Sanctions available for application to violators of IETF IPR Policy can be
>>>> found at [3].
>>>> 
>>>> Thank you.
>>>> 
>>>> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp78/
>>>> [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp79/
>>>> [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6701/
>>>> 
>>>> The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is:
>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsr-l2-bundle-member-remote-id/
>>>> 
>>>> There is also an HTML version available at:
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-lsr-l2-bundle-member-remote-id-03.html
>>>> 
>>>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>>>> https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-lsr-l2-bundle-member-remote-id-03
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Lsr mailing list -- [email protected]
>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Lsr mailing list -- [email protected]
>>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>> 
> 

_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to