bess@ietf.org

[Ali Sajassi (sajassi)]

Hi Stephane,


Jorge and I had a meeting to discuss our comments on the following two drafts 
that are going through WG call:

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-snr-bess-pbb-evpn-isid-cmacflush-06
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-snr-bess-evpn-loop-protect/

and reached the following resolutions:

On isid-cmacflush, we agreed to proceed with this draft and since we don’t want 
to have two separate solutions for I-SID flushing in PBB-EVPN, we decided to 
remove the section on I-SID flushing in virtual-eth-segment. The main factor 
for this decision was the fact that isid-cmacflush draft has been implemented 
by at least one vendor; whereas, the isid flusing section in 
virtual-eth-segment draft has not been implemented by any vendor to best of our 
knowledge even though the draft at large has been implemented by many vendors. 
If any of the co-authors or WG individual has any comment about this, please 
speak up, otherwise we’ll remove the appropriate section.

On loop-protect draft, we agreed on holding its WG adoption at this time and 
extend mac mobility in rfc7432bis to cover loops. The main factor for this 
decision was the fact that the detection mechanism for loop-protect draft is 
the same as mac-duplicate detection mechanism in section 15.1 of RFC 7432. So, 
we agreed we can build based on that and add some paragraphs to describe the 
action of loop protection. Once rfc7432bis is out, we would like to encourage 
people to read it and, unless there is feedback against it, the loop-protect 
draft will be abandoned. If there is feedback stating 7432bis is not enough for 
loop protection, at that time we can discuss if the loop-protect draft needs to 
be resumed and extended or if a new draft is needed.

Regards,
Ali & Jorge
___
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

Re: [bess] WG adoption and IPR poll for draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services-02

[Bernier, Daniel]

Hi,


As co-author I approve adoption. I am also unaware of any undisclosed IPR


Cheers,


Dan B?


From: BESS  on behalf of Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) 

Sent: Friday, September 27, 2019 6:59 AM
To: draft-dawra-bess-srv6-servi...@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org
Subject: [EXT][bess] WG adoption and IPR poll for 
draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services-02

Hello,

This email begins a two-weeks WG adoption poll for 
draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services-02 [1] .

Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group list.

We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to this 
Document, 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 an author or a contributor of this document, please 
respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant 
undisclosed IPR, copying the BESS mailing list. The document won't progress 
without answers from all the authors and contributors.
Currently, there are no IPR disclosures against this document.

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

This poll for adoption closes on Friday 11th October 2019.

Regards,
Matthew and Stephane

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services/


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

Re: [bess] WG adoption and IPR poll for draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services-02

[Dirk Steinberg]

Hi,
 
I am not aware of any IPR regarding this draft.
 
Best
Dirk Steinberg

> Am 27.09.2019 um 12:59 schrieb Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) 
> :
> 
> Hello,
>  
> This email begins a two-weeks WG adoption poll for 
> draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services-02 [1] .
>  
> Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group list.
>  
> We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to this 
> Document, 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 an author or a contributor of this document, please 
> respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any 
> relevant undisclosed IPR, copying the BESS mailing list. The document won't 
> progress without answers from all the authors and contributors.
> Currently, there are no IPR disclosures against this document.
>  
> If you are not listed as an author or a contributor, then please explicitly 
> respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet been disclosed in 
> conformance with IETF rules.
>  
> This poll for adoption closes on Friday 11th October 2019.  
>  
> Regards,
> Matthew and Stephane
>  
> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services/ 
> 
>  
>  
> ___
> 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] WG adoption and IPR poll for draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services-02

[Darren Dukes (ddukes)]

In addition I am not aware of undisclosed IPR.

Thanks
  Darren


From: Darren Dukes (ddukes) 
Sent: Monday, October 7, 2019 8:33 AM
To: Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)
Cc: draft-dawra-bess-srv6-servi...@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [bess] WG adoption and IPR poll for 
draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services-02

Support

On Sep 27, 2019, at 6:59 AM, Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) 
mailto:matthew.bo...@nokia.com>> wrote:

Hello,

This email begins a two-weeks WG adoption poll for 
draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services-02 [1] .

Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group list.

We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to this 
Document, 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 an author or a contributor of this document, please 
respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant 
undisclosed IPR, copying the BESS mailing list. The document won't progress 
without answers from all the authors and contributors.
Currently, there are no IPR disclosures against this document.

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

This poll for adoption closes on Friday 11th October 2019.

Regards,
Matthew and Stephane

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services/


___
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] WG adoption and IPR poll for draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services-02

[Bertrand Duvivier (bduvivie)]

I support WG adoption of this draft.

From: BESS  on behalf of "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)" 

Date: Friday 27 September 2019 at 12:59
To: "draft-dawra-bess-srv6-servi...@ietf.org" 
, "bess@ietf.org" 
Subject: [bess] WG adoption and IPR poll for draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services-02

Hello,

This email begins a two-weeks WG adoption poll for 
draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services-02 [1] .

Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group list.

We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to this 
Document, 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 an author or a contributor of this document, please 
respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant 
undisclosed IPR, copying the BESS mailing list. The document won't progress 
without answers from all the authors and contributors.
Currently, there are no IPR disclosures against this document.

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

This poll for adoption closes on Friday 11th October 2019.

Regards,
Matthew and Stephane

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services/


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

Re: [bess] WG adoption and IPR poll for draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services-02

[Francois Clad (fclad)]

I support WG adoption of this draft.

Regards,
Francois

From: BESS  on behalf of "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)" 

Date: Friday 27 September 2019 at 12:59
To: "draft-dawra-bess-srv6-servi...@ietf.org" 
, "bess@ietf.org" 
Subject: [bess] WG adoption and IPR poll for draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services-02

Hello,

This email begins a two-weeks WG adoption poll for 
draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services-02 [1] .

Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group list.

We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to this 
Document, 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 an author or a contributor of this document, please 
respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant 
undisclosed IPR, copying the BESS mailing list. The document won't progress 
without answers from all the authors and contributors.
Currently, there are no IPR disclosures against this document.

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

This poll for adoption closes on Friday 11th October 2019.

Regards,
Matthew and Stephane

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services/


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

Re: [bess] draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy-03 shepherd's review

[Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View)]

Hi Ali,

Thank you for considering my comments.

About the error handling aspects, we are happy to provide some text.

About the use of leave group synch sequence number, to be honest, in order to 
suggest text, I would need to understand what the value of this seq number is, 
and what situations solves. Depending on that we should specify the right error 
handling in order to avoid interop issues. Can you guys elaborate here?

Also, when there is a router R attached to a BD on a PE, and the PE receives an 
SMET route, the text mentions the PE needs to generate IGMP/MLD reports to R. 
But the text does not say what to do in case R only supports version x but the 
SMET includes version y. Sorry if we missed it.

Thanks.
Jorge


From: "Ali Sajassi (sajassi)" 
Date: Thursday, October 10, 2019 at 2:16 AM
To: "Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View)" , 
"stephane.litkow...@orange.com" , "Mankamana 
Mishra (mankamis)" , 
"draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org" 
, "bess@ietf.org" 
Subject: Re: [bess] draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy-03 shepherd's review


Hi Jorge,

Thanks for your comments and I agree with you that it can be improved further.

With respect to your editorial comments (i.e., first two bullets and the 
typos), we’ll take care of them but with respect to your non-editorial comments 
(i.e., last two bullets), can you provide us with your proposed texts as the 
starting point.

Cheers,
Ali

From: "Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View)" 
Date: Wednesday, October 9, 2019 at 5:02 PM
To: "stephane.litkow...@orange.com" , "Mankamana 
Mishra (mankamis)" , 
"draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org" 
, "bess@ietf.org" 
Subject: Re: [bess] draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy-03 shepherd's review
Resent-From: 
Resent-To: Cisco Employee , , 
, , 
Resent-Date: Wednesday, October 9, 2019 at 5:01 PM

Hi Mankamana and authors,

I went through version 4 of this draft. Looks much better, thanks.
I still think it can be improved before it progresses further:


-The abstract and introduction should already say that the procedures are 
valid for MLD proxy, in addition to IGMP proxy. The last paragraph in the 
terminology section is good, but I think it should go into the introduction 
IMHO.

-“IGMP” join/leave synch route is still used throughout the text, whereas 
Multicast join/leave synch route should be used.

-Error handling for routes type 6/7/8:

o   Can you mix source and groups of different families? I assume not, but it 
would be nice to be explicit

o   Can the originator IP be of different family than source/group? I assume 
yes, but it would be nice to be explicit

-Multicast Leave synch route and Leave Group Synch sequence number, needs 
clarification, I think it is underspecified:

o   The PE advertising the route will increment the seq number with each leave 
procedure for the (x,G), but how does it have to be processed at reception?

o   Is a new seq number for the same [RD,esi,tag,(x,G),orig] restarting the max 
response time for the (x,G)?

o   What if the received seq number is lesser than the previous one for the 
same route? Any action?


Typos:

-Section 4.1.1 – s/the exclude flag MUST also needs to/the exclude flag 
MUST/

-Section 4.1.2 – s/MUST withdraws/MUST withdraw/

-Section 5.1 – s/IMGMPv3/IGMPv3/

Thank you!
Jorge

From: BESS  on behalf of "stephane.litkow...@orange.com" 

Date: Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 9:29 AM
To: "Mankamana Mishra (mankamis)" , 
"draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org" 
, "bess@ietf.org" 
Subject: Re: [bess] draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy-03 shepherd's review

Hi Mankamana,

Pls find additional feedbacks inline.

Brgds,

Stephane


From: Mankamana Mishra (mankamis) [mailto:manka...@cisco.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2019 00:38
To: LITKOWSKI Stephane OBS/OINIS; draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org; 
bess@ietf.org
Cc: Mankamana Mishra (mankamis)
Subject: Re: [bess] draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy-03 shepherd's review

Hi Stephane,
Thanks for your review comment. Please find inline.

Thanks
Mankamana


From: BESS  on behalf of "stephane.litkow...@orange.com" 

Date: Tuesday, August 20, 2019 at 6:20 AM
To: "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org" 
, "bess@ietf.org" 
Subject: [bess] draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy-03 shepherd's review

Hi,

There are some Nits to fix:
https://www6.ietf.org/tools/idnits?url=https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy-03.txt


Here is my review of the document:

Abstract & Intro:
s/RFC 7432/ RFC7432.
The reference should be removed from the abstract (as per IDNits).
Mankamana:   Will be taken care of in next revision.

§2.1:
It may be good to change the paragraph name to IGMP/MLD proxy and use IGMP/MLD 
in the paragraph. This comment could apply to various other places of the 
document.
 Mankamana: Will take care for paragraph name. Inside paragraph we have used 
IGMP , and start of the document we did state that all of IGMP procedure