Hi,
As a co-author, I support this draft for WG adoption.
I am not aware of any IPR relevant to this document.
Thank you,
Jorge
From: BESS on behalf of Stephane Litkowski (slitkows)
Date: Monday, October 10, 2022 at 10:40 AM
To: bess-cha...@ietf.org , bess@ietf.org
Subject: [bess] WG
Hi Mankamana,
Thank you for your review. We’ve published version 04, which addresses your
comments. Also incorporates Greg Mirsky’s comments (thanks Greg!) about the
section that talks about the optional use of BFD in the solution. By the way,
this section has a reference to
Saumya,
Please see in-line.
Thanks.
Jorge
From: BESS on behalf of Dikshit, Saumya
Date: Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 10:43 AM
To: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-pref-df@ietf.org
Cc: bess@ietf.org , bess-cha...@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [bess] Few queries on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-pref-df
Hello Authors,
Hi Stewart,
Thanks for reviewing. Changes are incorporated in version 10 that we just
published. Please see my comments in-line with [jorge].
Thx
Jorge
From: Stewart Bryant via Datatracker
Date: Tuesday, August 30, 2022 at 12:41 PM
To: rtg-...@ietf.org
Cc: bess@ietf.org ,
Hi Sue,
Sorry, it took us longer than we wanted.
We appreciate your comments. We put some work onto the draft with some back and
forth discussions among the authors and other WG members. Based on that, we
published version 7.
With version 7 in mind, please see my responses in-line with
Hi Sasha,
Sorry for the big delay.
That was indeed a bug, fixed in version 09, just posted.
Thank you very much for letting us know.
Thanks.
Jorge
From: Alexander Vainshtein
Date: Monday, February 21, 2022 at 4:04 PM
To: Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Sunnyvale)
Cc: bess@ietf.org , draft-ietf
FYI
This is an update of the draft that addresses the comments made during the
WGLC. Some other changes are added to improve readability.
Please let us know if you have comments.
Thank you!
Jorge
From: BESS on behalf of internet-dra...@ietf.org
Date: Thursday, June 23, 2022 at 1:12 PM
To:
Hi Yubao,
RFC7432 assumes MPLS transport and hence label fields are 20-bit long.
RFC8365 though assumes NVO transport and the label fields are 24-bit long.
That’s why Ketan mentioned the label field in EVPN routes is 24-bit long.
Thanks.
Jorge
From: BESS on behalf of wang.yub...@zte.com.cn
the control plane
out of synch sounds wrong to me.
Thanks.
Jorge
From: Dikshit, Saumya
Date: Friday, June 17, 2022 at 1:35 PM
To: Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Sunnyvale) ,
draft-ietf-bess-rfc7432...@ietf.org
Cc: bess@ietf.org
Subject: RE: (Authors of draft-ietf-bess-rfc7432bis) : Query regarding Loop
Hi,
It refers to the fact that the MAC is flushed from the bridge-table and
therefore it is no longer duplicate. The router needs to clear the duplicate
state and obviously, if the mac keeps moving, the router starts counting the
moves again withing the duplication window.
The key point is
I concur with Sasha.
We’ve been gone through a significant effort to unify the service signaling by
using EVPN. If we are missing anything in EVPN VPWS compared to T-LDP based
PWs, I would rather look at extending EVPN VPWS (if needed). If not an option,
it would good to discuss at least why
Hi,
As a co-author I’m not aware of any relevant IPR.
Nokia is planning to implement this, but no implementation yet.
Thanks.
Jorge
From: slitkows.i...@gmail.com
Date: Wednesday, May 18, 2022 at 12:23 AM
To: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-redundant-mcast-sou...@ietf.org
, bess@ietf.org
Cc:
Hi Saumya,
From: Dikshit, Saumya
Date: Tuesday, March 29, 2022 at 2:13 PM
To: Luc André Burdet , Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia -
US/Sunnyvale) ,
draft-saumvinayak-bess-all-df-...@ietf.org
, bess@ietf.org
Subject: RE: draft-saumvinayak-bess-all-df-bum
Hello Jorge, Luc,
Thanks a lot, for suggesting
you need? Sorry
if I’m missing something here.
Please help me understand why you are using a non-zero ethernet segment here.
Thanks!
Jorge
From: Dikshit, Saumya
Date: Thursday, March 24, 2022 at 11:15 AM
To: Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Sunnyvale) ,
draft-saumvinayak-bess-all-df-...@ietf.org
Hi Saumya,
Best path selection for EVPN routes is something that indeed we will clarify in
rfc7432bis, as mentioned at the BESS session during the presentation of
draft-sr-bess-evpn-dpath-01. We will update the draft in next version, Luc and
the rest of the authors will take the action. Luc
Dear Saumya and authors,
I wanted to follow up on what I mentioned at the mic this morning during the
BESS session:
1. You are requesting DF Alg codepoint 2 for this draft, which clashes with
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-pref-df-08#section-6
– a Working Group
Hi Loa,
We changed the draft’s name before posting it at the very last minute and I
failed to update the chairs/Mankamana with the new name for the agenda.
My apologies for that. The agenda should list this one instead:
draft-sr-bess-evpn-vpws-gateway-00
Hi,
I fully support this document for WG adoption.
1) Does this technology support the SR P2MP features
that distributes candidate paths which connect
a multicast distribution tree (tree to leaves).
Yes, it does.
2) Is the technology correctly specified for the
NLRI (AFI/SAFI) and the tunnel
I agree with Vasilenko.
The meaning of the label is given by the encapsulation, e.g. for the EVPN
family, label=VNI if the bgp encapsulation extended community indicates VXLAN,
and label=MPLS-label if the encapsulation indicates MPLS.
In this document, the label is a transposed function if the
the necessary edits to make the text
consistent with that, as part of this WGLC.
Thanks!
Jorge
From: Gyan Mishra
Date: Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 8:37 PM
To: Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Sunnyvale)
Cc: Anoop Ghanwani , BESS ,
bess-cha...@ietf.org ,
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-mh-split-hori...@ietf.org
Hi Sasha,
Sorry for the delay, this email fell through the cracks..
Please see in-line.
Thanks for the feedback.
Jorge
From: Alexander Vainshtein
Date: Thursday, December 9, 2021 at 1:12 PM
To: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-pref-df@ietf.org
Cc: bess@ietf.org
Subject: Queries on
Thank you Anoop. We will fix those in the next version.
Jorge
From: Anoop Ghanwani
Date: Saturday, February 5, 2022 at 12:19 AM
To: slitkows.i...@gmail.com
Cc: BESS , draft-ietf-bess-evpn-mh-split-hori...@ietf.org
, bess-cha...@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll
Hi everyone,
I’m not aware of any relevant undisclosed IPR.
Thanks.
Jorge
From: Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)
Date: Monday, January 31, 2022 at 2:58 PM
To: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-fast-df-recov...@ietf.org
, bess@ietf.org
Cc: bess-cha...@ietf.org
Subject: WGLC, IPR and Implementation Poll for
in the other two drafts. It would be
bad to publish 7432-bis to have it updated immediately after.
Can we create the registry in 7432-bis then?
Thanks!
Jorge
From: Luc André Burdet
Date: Friday, January 28, 2022 at 11:26 AM
To: Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Sunnyvale) ,
slitkows.i...@gmail.com , bess
Hi,
As a co-author, I’m not aware of any related IPR.
Nokia’s implementation follow the default aspects described in the document,
and plans to add support for the full specification in the coming releases.
Thank you.
Jorge
From: slitkows.i...@gmail.com
Date: Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at
Hi Luc,
As usual, that is an excellent point.
One of the two draft should start a registry in the IANA section. Stephane,
chairs, any preference where this should reside?
@Luc, about this:
“This has come up before for e.g. draft-ietf-bess-evpn-l2gw-proto which
requests a 3-bit field for
Thank you John.
Jorge
From: John Scudder
Date: Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 8:32 AM
To: Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Sunnyvale)
Cc: The IESG , draft-ietf-bess-evpn-optimized...@ietf.org
, bess-cha...@ietf.org
, bess@ietf.org , Bocci, Matthew (Nokia -
GB)
Subject: Re: John Scudder's Discuss
Hi John,
Sorry for the delay.
I agree the document improved significantly and your thorough review and great
points had a lot to do with it. So thank you very much on behalf of the authors.
Just published version 12 which addresses your comments. I’m adding my comments
below in-line with
Hi Eduard,
Sounds like a reasonable request to me. We’ll look into it for the next version.
Thank you!
Jorge
From: Vasilenko Eduard
Date: Wednesday, January 12, 2022 at 7:09 PM
To: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-ipvpn-interworking@ietf.org
Cc: bess@ietf.org
Subject: Is
29 matches
Mail list logo
