Re: [bess] WG Adoption and IPR Poll for draft-litkowski-bess-rfc5549revision-00

2019-12-03 Thread Satya Mohanty (satyamoh)
Support. Thanks, --Satya From: BESS on behalf of "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)" Date: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 at 4:37 AM To: "bess@ietf.org" Cc: "bess-cha...@ietf.org" Subject: [bess] WG Adoption and IPR Poll for draft-litkowski-bess-rfc5549revision-00 Hello, This email begins a

Re: [bess] WG Adoption and IPR Poll for draft-litkowski-bess-rfc5549revision-00

2019-12-03 Thread Mankamana Mishra (mankamis)
Support From: "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)" Date: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 at 6:07 PM To: "bess@ietf.org" Cc: "bess-cha...@ietf.org" Subject: WG Adoption and IPR Poll for draft-litkowski-bess-rfc5549revision-00 Resent-From: Resent-To: , , Resent-Date: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 at

Re: [bess] WG Adoption and IPR Poll for draft-litkowski-bess-rfc5549revision-00

2019-12-03 Thread Acee Lindem (acee)
Hi Robert, Even in the fastidious IDR WG, an implementation report is NOT a requirement for WG adoption. Here is the policy for BESS: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/cG3X1tTqb_vPC4rg56SEdkjqDpw So, there will be a poll at WG last call but not necessarily a formal report Wiki. Hope

Re: [bess] WG Adoption and IPR Poll for draft-litkowski-bess-rfc5549revision-00

2019-12-03 Thread Robert Raszuk
Hi Acee, There is no single vendor mentioned. There is no name of the reporter mentioned. This is not an implementation report. This draft sole reasoning is based on the implementations. I am looking for formal implementation report - just like we always do in idr:

Re: [bess] WG Adoption and IPR Poll for draft-litkowski-bess-rfc5549revision-00

2019-12-03 Thread Acee Lindem (acee)
Hi Robert, From: Robert Raszuk Date: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 at 8:25 AM To: Acee Lindem Cc: "slitkows.i...@gmail.com" , "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)" , "bess-cha...@ietf.org" , "bess@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [bess] WG Adoption and IPR Poll for draft-litkowski-bess-rfc5549revision-00 Hi, I

Re: [bess] WG Adoption and IPR Poll for draft-litkowski-bess-rfc5549revision-00

2019-12-03 Thread Robert Raszuk
Hi, I am not that naive to think that you can do something else here ;) But can you at least send a pointer to formal implementation report before proceeding ? Thx a lot, R. On Tue, Dec 3, 2019, 13:17 Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: > Hi Robert, > > My point is that your proposal to save the 8

Re: [bess] WG Adoption and IPR Poll for draft-litkowski-bess-rfc5549revision-00

2019-12-03 Thread Acee Lindem (acee)
Hi Robert, My point is that your proposal to save the 8 bytes of RD can be independent of correcting RFC 5449. It is pretty much a no-brainer that revising the specification to match the de facto standard of all extant implementations is preferable to a non-trivial upgrade and migration.

Re: [bess] WG Adoption and IPR Poll for draft-litkowski-bess-rfc5549revision-00

2019-12-03 Thread Zhuangshunwan
Hi Robert, Inline with [Shunwan] Best Regards, Shunwan From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Robert Raszuk Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2019 7:37 AM To: Acee Lindem (acee) Cc: Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) ; bess-cha...@ietf.org; slitkows.i...@gmail.com; bess@ietf.org Subject: