[bess] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-bidir-ingress-replication-03: (with COMMENT)
Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-bidir-ingress-replication-03: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-bidir-ingress-replication/ -- COMMENT: -- I have one less and two more serious comments... - Less seriously, "MP2MP tunnel" seems like a strange use of language, I wondered if it might be better to call these an MP2MP warren (as in rabbit warren, and of course bearing in mind the ops-dir review:-) - More seriously, this is another draft that simply has too many acronyms and uses those too densely. For example, I just find it really hard to believe that "If a PE, say PEx, is connected to a site of a given VPN, and PEx's next hop interface to some C-RPA is a VRF interface, then PEx MUST advertises a (C-*,C-*-BIDIR) S-PMSI A-D route, regardless of whether it has any local Bidir-PIM join states corresponding to the C-RPA learned from its CEs" is a useful sentence to implementers. IMO enough folks have commented on this aspect that the wg would be wise to seriously consider the readibility of their output. I've worked on enough EU-funded projects that had write-only documents to be worried if the IETF starts to produce those. (This is not a discuss since I've been assured that this is not a problem for implementers, and while I do accept that, I also continue to worry about it.) - I am simply not in a position to evaluate section 4. And nor was the assigned secdir reviewer. The same point about density and that making any secdir review hard to impossible was noted by the secdir reviewer for draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-bidir. I don't think it'd be valid for me to put on a discuss on the basis that nothing this complex has "no new security issues" but it was tempting. Overall, I think it would be best if this were returned to the wg asking for significant improvement in clarity for readers. ___ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-morin-bess-mvpn-fast-failover
Authors, we are 1 day before the deadline and I am missing feedbacks on IPR from: Kanwar, Ray, Praveen, Jayant, Pradeep, Clayton, Nehal, and Rahul. So please, do reply. In the meantime, additional positions wrt the document are welcome from the WG participants. -m Le 02/10/2015 12:29, Martin Vigoureux a écrit : Hello working group, This email starts a two-week poll on adopting draft-morin-bess-mvpn-fast-failover [1] as a working group item. Please send comments to the list and state if you support adoption or not (in the later case, please also state the reasons). This poll runs until the *16th of October*. Currently there is no IPR disclosed against this document. *Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). *If you are listed as a document author or contributor* please respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from each author and contributor. If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. Thank you, Martin & Thomas bess chairs [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-morin-bess-mvpn-fast-failover ___ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess ___ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-morin-bess-mvpn-fast-failover
I support the adoption of this draft by the WG. ___ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
[bess] Feedback on draft-boutros-bess-vxlan-evpn-00.txt
Hi, The draft has been around for almost 3 years and it is about interconnecting VXLAN or NVGRE networks with data plane mac learning via EVPN, the draft is informational and describe as well some useful use cases. Thanks, Sami ___ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
[bess] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bess-ir-02.txt
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the BGP Enabled Services Working Group of the IETF. Title : Ingress Replication Tunnels in Multicast VPN Authors : Eric C. Rosen Karthik Subramanian Zhaohui Zhang Filename: draft-ietf-bess-ir-02.txt Pages : 22 Date: 2015-10-15 Abstract: RFCs 6513, 6514, and other RFCs describe procedures by which a Service Provider may offer Multicast VPN service to its customers. These procedures create point-to-multipoint (P2MP) or multipoint-to- multipoint trees across the Service Provider's backbone. One type of P2MP tree that may be used is known as an "Ingress Replication (IR) tunnel". In an IR tunnel, a parent node need not be "directly connected" to its child nodes. When a parent node has to send a multicast data packet to its child nodes, it does not use layer 2 multicast, IP multicast, or MPLS multicast to do so. Rather, it makes n individual copies, and then unicasts each copy, through an IP or MPLS unicast tunnel, to exactly one child node. While the prior MVPN specifications allow the use of IR tunnels, those specifications are not always very clear or explicit about how the MVPN protocol elements and procedures are applied to IR tunnels. This document updates RFCs 6513 and 6514 by adding additional details that are specific to the use of IR tunnels. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-ir/ There's also a htmlized version available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bess-ir-02 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-bess-ir-02 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/ ___ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
