Hi Stephane,
I am not aware of any IPR that has not already been disclosed against this
document.
Thanks,
Adrian
From: BESS On Behalf Of
stephane.litkow...@orange.com
Sent: 21 January 2019 13:06
To: bess@ietf.org
Cc: bess-cha...@ietf.org
Subject: [bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation
The receiver PE cannot keep its state to receive on both tunnels forever. After
some time, it has to leave the old tunnel.
Jeffrey
> -Original Message-
> From: Xiejingrong [mailto:xiejingr...@huawei.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 9:09 PM
> To: Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang ;
Hi Jeffrey,
Thanks for the explaination.
I have the same understanding "the text in RFC6625 is really/mainly about which
tunnel to send/receive on in a steady state."
What confusing me is the "which tunnel to receive" decision, obviously on
receiver site PE.
In my opinion, the receiver site PE
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the BGP Enabled ServiceS WG of the IETF.
Title : EVPN Optimized Inter-Subnet Multicast (OISM)
Forwarding
Authors : Wen Lin
Hi Jingrong,
You're right that to avoid disruption and duplication a switchover delay is
needed on the source PE and desired on the receiver PE, and that means the
forwarding state needs to accommodate that.
However, the text is in RFC6625 is really/mainly about which tunnel to
send/receive
Not aware of any IPR
Support (co-author)
Luay
On Jan 21, 2019 7:06 AM, wrote:
Hello Working Group,
This email starts a three weeks Working Group Last Call on
draft-ietf-bess-nsh-bgp-control-plane [1].
This poll runs until *the 4th of February*.
We are also polling for knowledge of
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the BGP Enabled ServiceS WG of the IETF.
Title : Yang Data Model for Multicast in MPLS/BGP IP VPNs
Authors : Yisong Liu
Feng
