Hi Chairs,
I’d like to request WG adoption for the following draft:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-kaliraj-bess-bgp-sig-private-mpls-labels/
I have presented it in IETF-111, IETF-117, and had requested WG adoption at the
mic in IETF-117.
Could you please put my request in the queue?
Hi,
Sharing my impressions on draft-zzhang-bess-vpn-option-bc, which I had earlier
shared offline with Jeffrey and Kireeti.
We lose “indirection” by carrying a label stack (combining service label and
transport label) in service-routes.
That will affects us in following ways:
* Nexthop
Please give me a 10-minutes slot to give update on:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-kaliraj-bess-bgp-sig-private-mpls-labels/
Thanks,
Kaliraj
Juniper Business Use Only
From: BESS on behalf of Mankamana Mishra (mankamis)
Date: Friday, June 30, 2023 at 7:32 AM
To: bess@ietf.org
Hi Mankamana,
I would like to present the following:
1/ BGP MPLS-namespaces: Improve Scaling and Convergence in Seamless-MPLS
networks:
draft-kaliraj-bess-bgp-sig-private-mpls-labels 15 minutes
It is an idea that pertains to scaling BGP-LU and BGP-CT deployments
Thanks
Kaliraj
-label or different labels for
v4,v6; whichever method works for the platform.
Thanks
Kaliraj
From: Gyan Mishra
Date: Tuesday, April 13, 2021 at 7:28 PM
To: Kaliraj Vairavakkalai
Cc: Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) , bess@ietf.org
, draft-mishra-bess-deployment-guide-ipv4nlri-ipv...@ietf.org
Subject
, the box may need to peak into the mpls
payload traffic, to determine whether it needs to send a v4 or v6 pkt towards
the CE. Whether the platform supports such forwarding ability is the question.
Thanks
Kaliraj
From: Gyan Mishra
Date: Tuesday, April 13, 2021 at 6:33 PM
To: Kaliraj Vairavakkalai
I support adoption of this draft.
I have a couple of comments:
In section 6, “Changes resulting from a single IPv6 transport peer carrying
IPv4 NLRI and IPv6 NLRI below:”
It may be worth noting that this model may have some change to feature that use
Pop-n-Forward MPLS-label forwarding.
-optimizations is questionable; considering the routes may contain
distinct communities used to identify the originating-region and other such
operator policies.
Thanks
Kaliraj
From: Dhananjaya Rao (dhrao)
Date: Thursday, March 25, 2021 at 1:11 PM
To: Kaliraj Vairavakkalai ,
draft-dskc-bess-bgp-car.auth
Hi CAR authors,
Thanks for the presentations in IDR and BESS meetings at IETF-110 last week.
We could not discuss in detail during the session because of time constraints.
So
sharing my comments to the mailing lists.
Starting with follow-up on what Ketan mentioned in the IDR meetecho
Hi Mankamana,
I would like to request two slots for the following topics:
1. BGP Classful Transport planes –
draft-kaliraj-idr-bgp-classful-transport-planes-07
Time: 15 minutes
This draft is being presented in IDR WG also. I would like to introduce this
draft to BESS WG also, if the WG
10 matches
Mail list logo
