Hi Martin,
I¹d like to request the following two slots:
Slot-1:
https:///www.ietf.org/id/draft-sajassi-bess-evpn-fast-df-recovery-00.txt
Ali Sajassi
10 min
Slot-2:
https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-keyupate-bess-evpn-virtual-hub-00.txt
Ali Sajassi or Jeffrey Zhang
15 min
Cheers,
Ali
On 3/6/17,
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the BGP Enabled ServiceS of the IETF.
Title : Yang Data Model for EVPN
Authors : Patrice Brissette
Ali Sajassi
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the BGP Enabled ServiceS of the IETF.
Title : YANG Data Model for MPLS-based L2VPN
Authors : Himanshu Shah
Patrice Brissette
Reviewer: Matthew Miller
Review result: Ready
I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's
ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the
IESG. These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the
security area directors. Document editors and WG
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the BGP Enabled ServiceS of the IETF.
Title : YANG Data Model for MPLS-based L2VPN
Authors : Himanshu Shah
Patrice Brissette
Hi Sami,
About this:
“I think having a PE send P=B=0 to be ignored by the receiving PE is not a good
logic to start with, One can argue why send something that will be ignored
anyway?”
[JORGE] yes, ignore is not the best term.
I’m not sure I get what you mean by wrongly withdraw the route? we
I agree with Sami.
Thanks,
Himanshu
From: BESS on behalf of Sami Boutros
Date: Monday, March 13, 2017 at 12:38 PM
To: "Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US)" , "Acee Lindem
(acee)" , "bess@ietf.org" ,
"rtg-...@tools.ietf.org" , "rtg-...@ietf.org"
, "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-v...@ietf.org"
Subject: Re:
Hi Jorge,
Isn’t the end result is to clear any previous state that the receiving PE
learned from the PE that’s advertising now P=B=0?
I think having a PE send P=B=0 to be ignored by the receiving PE is not a good
logic to start with, One can argue why send something that will be ignored
anyway
Dear authors,
You made a mistake with the CODE BEGINS/CODE ENDS with this new draft
version.
https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-bess-l2vpn-yang-03.txt
This should be:
file "ietf-l2...@2016-10-24.yang"
and not
(CODE BEGINS) file "ietf-l2...@2017-03-06.yang
Ditto for CODE ENDS.
As
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the BGP Enabled ServiceS of the IETF.
Title : Multicast VPN fast upstream failover
Authors : Thomas Morin
Robert Kebler
Hi Acee and Sami,
Thank you both for explaining, I think I now understand your point.
I thought the sentence had more to do with error handling at application level,
hence my point that P=B=0 was a legitimate combination.
I think the three of us agree that receiving an update with P=B=0 is an
Hi Jorge,
The issue I see with ignoring the routes with P and B Flags clear is the
following:
What if a PE advertised P or B Flag set then decide to send P and B Flags
clear, what should we do in that case?
Ignore the P and B Flags clear route and keep the old P or B Flag set route,
wouldn’t
Hi Jorge,
On 3/13/17, 9:04 AM, "BESS on behalf of Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US)"
wrote:
>Sami,
>
>About this one:
>
>³ 1. Why is receiving an extended community with both the P and B flags
>set treated as a withdrawal, while it is ignored for the case when both
>the P and B flags are clear?
>
>
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the BGP Enabled ServiceS of the IETF.
Title : Usage and applicability of BGP MPLS based Ethernet VPN
Authors : Jorge Rabadan
Sen
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the BGP Enabled ServiceS of the IETF.
Title : YANG Data Model for MPLS-based L2VPN
Authors : Himanshu Shah
Patrice Brissette
Sami,
About this one:
“ 1. Why is receiving an extended community with both the P and B flags
set treated as a withdrawal, while it is ignored for the case when both
the P and B flags are clear?
I agree both should be treated as a withdrawal, I will change the text.”
[JORGE] Sami, please cor
16 matches
Mail list logo