Re: [bess] WG adoption call and IPR poll for draft-rabadan-bess-vendor-evpn-route-07

Hi WG, The poll has ended. Some concerns have been raised on having this opaque route. More discussion is required before adopting the document. Stephane From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Stephane Litkowski Sent: Monday, August 19, 2019 16:32 To: bess@ietf.org Subject: [be

Re: [bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy

Great ! thanks From: Mankamana Mishra (mankamis) [mailto:manka...@cisco.com] Sent: Monday, September 02, 2019 17:05 To: LITKOWSKI Stephane OBS/OINIS; Anoop Ghanwani Cc: bess@ietf.org; bess-cha...@ietf.org Subject: Re: [bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-prox

Re: [bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy

Hi Mankamana, When do you think the next revision will be available ? Thanks, Stephane From: Mankamana Mishra (mankamis) [mailto:manka...@cisco.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2019 23:17 To: Anoop Ghanwani Cc: LITKOWSKI Stephane OBS/OINIS; bess@ietf.org; bess-cha...@ietf.org Subject: Re: [bess]

[bess] WG adoption poll and IPR poll for draft-snr-bess-evpn-loop-protect

Hi, This email begins a two-weeks WG adoption poll for draft-snr-bess-evpn-loop-protect-04 [1] Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group list. We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to this Document, to ensure that IPR has been disclo

Re: [bess] draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy-03 shepherd's review

Hi Mankamana, Pls find additional feedbacks inline. Brgds, Stephane From: Mankamana Mishra (mankamis) [mailto:manka...@cisco.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2019 00:38 To: LITKOWSKI Stephane OBS/OINIS; draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org Cc: Mankamana Mishra (mankamis)

Re: [bess] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-fast-failover-07.txt

Thanks Greg, I will have a look at the document in the coming weeks and proceed accordingly. From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Greg Mirsky Sent: Sunday, August 25, 2019 02:12 To: BESS; bess-cha...@ietf.org; Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang Subject: [bess] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-

Re: [bess] WG adoption call and IPR poll for draft-rabadan-bess-vendor-evpn-route-07

Hi, Speaking as individual, what is the goal of the vendor key ? Is it to allow a vendor to encode multiple “sub-types” with different vendor specific info ? Or is it a security key ? That would be great to mention how a vendor should use it. Thanks ! From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org

[bess] draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy-03 shepherd's review

Hi, There are some Nits to fix: https://www6.ietf.org/tools/idnits?url=https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy-03.txt Here is my review of the document: Abstract & Intro: s/RFC 7432/ RFC7432. The reference should be removed from the abstract (as per IDNits). §2.1:

[bess] Affiliation change

Hi WG, This email is just to let you know that my affiliation will change starting mid-September as I'm moving from Orange to Cisco. As per Martin's approval, I'll keep acting as co-chair for our WG. Brgds, Stephane __

Re: [bess] Discussion on various NH encoding

Hi WG, To followup on this item, we have scheduled an open mic slot during our first session on Tuesday to discuss this topic and see if there is an action plan to trigger. I'll prepare few slides to start the discussion. See you in Montreal and have good travel. Stephane From: stephane.litk

Re: [bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy

Hi WG, Sorry for the late feedback on this one. This WGLC is closed and there is no objection to progress. In addition, we have implementations. I note that Ali has to update the document and this will be part of the next revision. However this does not prevent to go to the next step. Brgds, F

Re: [bess] [Idr] [Softwires] Regarding the Next Hop Network Address coding for IPv4 VPN over IPv6 Core in RFC5549

Unfortunately I don’t have the history, we discovered this behavior when doing some VPNv6 testings a couple of months ago between IOS and Junos. IOS XE does advertise two nexthops. From: Robert Raszuk [mailto:rob...@raszuk.net] Sent: Friday, June 28, 2019 11:11 To: LITKOWSKI Stephane OBS/OINIS C

[bess] Discussion on various NH encoding

Hi WG, (Speaking as co-chair) The current discussion on the NH encodings in our AFI/SAFIs requires some particular attention. We would like to take the opportunity of the next IETF to discuss the subject face to face. In the meantime, we are looking for few volunteers who will: - Do

Re: [bess] [Softwires] [Idr] Regarding the Next Hop Network Address coding for IPv4 VPN over IPv6 Core in RFC5549

Hi Rajiv, IMO, I don’t think that “Inferring it from AFI/SAFI per section 3 of RFC4760” means that there is a format match between the NH field and NLRI, it just says that there is a relation between the AFI/SAFI and the protocol layer of the NH. When you know the AFI/SAFI, you can deduce the NH

Re: [bess] [Idr] [Softwires] Regarding the Next Hop Network Address coding for IPv4 VPN over IPv6 Core in RFC5549

Hi Robert, There are implementations which set two NHs, here is a capture: Update Message (2), length: 150 Multi-Protocol Reach NLRI (14), length: 100, Flags [O]: AFI: IPv6 (2), SAFI: labeled VPN Unicast (128) nexthop: RD: 0:0 (= 0.0.0.0), 2000::162RD: 0:0 (= 0.0

[bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy

Hello Working Group, This email starts a three weeks Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy [1]. This poll runs until *the 28th of June*. We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to this Document, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed

Re: [bess] WG adoption poll and IPR poll for draft-boutros-bess-evpn-geneve

Hi, The adoption poll is now closed with support and no objection and we have cleared the IPR poll as well. The document is adopted as a WG item. Authors, Please republish the document as draft-ietf-bess-evpn-geneve-00 Brgds, From: stephane.litkow...@orange.com [mailto:stephane.litkow...@ora

Re: [bess] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-bess-nsh-bgp-control-plane-06

Hi, I like this proposal. I don't think we need to put a strong requirement on the originator to withdraw the route. This could be seen as optional OR we could say that each BGP speaker should validate the path of the SFPR, if the path is invalid, it becomes unusable (like an unreachable nextho

Re: [bess] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-bess-nsh-bgp-control-plane-06

Hi Adrian, I'm not comfortable with the time-out of controlplane informations. How do you handle a situation where there is an unknown SFIR-RD in a hop TLV for a valid reason (the SF is down for a while !), so you are timing out the SFPR, and eventually the SF is restored and comes back online ?

Re: [bess] WG adoption poll and IPR poll for draft-boutros-bess-evpn-geneve

Hi WG, We are currently missing the IPR reply from Sam to clear the IPR poll. In addition, we lack of significant support for this draft, however we haven't seen any objection yet. We, chairs, think that this document is an important piece of work as GENEVE is the standard overlay from NVO3 WG.

Re: [bess] Poll to progress draft-ietf-bess-nsh-bgp-controlplane without implementation

Hi Sue, Thanks. This part is still under review and is not closed. If you have any particular comments, feel free to send the details. It would be great if you could also help the authors on the flowspec part of the draft if you think that it is not fully clear. Brgds, Stephane From: Susan

[bess] WG adoption poll and IPR poll for draft-boutros-bess-evpn-geneve

Hi, This email begins a two-week poll for adoption of draft-boutros-bess-evpn-geneve-04[1] Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group list. We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to this Document, to ensure that IPR has been disclose

Re: [bess] WG adoption call & IPR poll for draft-jain-bess-evpn-lsp-ping

Hi, We have a good amount of support. This draft is adopted as a WG document. Authors, Please republish the document with -ietf- v00. Thanks, From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of stephane.litkow...@orange.com Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2019 09:37 To: bess@ietf.org Subject: [bes

[bess] WG adoption call & IPR poll for draft-jain-bess-evpn-lsp-ping

Hi, This email begins a two-week poll for adoption of draft-jain-bess-evpn-lsp-ping-08[1] Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group list. We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to this Document, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed

Re: [bess] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-bess-nsh-bgp-control-plane-06

Hi Adrian, Please find some comments inline. Brgds -Original Message- From: Adrian Farrel [mailto:adr...@olddog.co.uk] Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2019 19:38 To: LITKOWSKI Stephane OBS/OINIS; draft-ietf-bess-nsh-bgp-control-pl...@ietf.org Cc: bess@ietf.org Subject: RE: Shepherd's review

Re: [bess] Poll to progress draft-ietf-bess-nsh-bgp-controlplane without implementation

Hi, We have a good amount of support to progress the document with implementations. We (chairs) are now waiting for the next I-D update to move forward. Brgds, From: Jeff Tantsura [mailto:jefftant.i...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, April 05, 2019 19:55 To: LITKOWSKI Stephane OBS/OINIS; Sami Boutros

[bess] Poll to progress draft-ietf-bess-nsh-bgp-controlplane without implementation

Hi WG, draft-ietf-bess-nsh-bgp-controlplane has passed WGLC and its finishing the shepherd's review phasis (I-D update required). It is in a good shape to progress further. However we are not aware of any implementation. As per our Implementation Requirement Policy, we need to poll the WG to kn

[bess] Poll to continue or not the work on draft-ietf-bess-service-chaining

Hi WG, As pointed on the mailing list and during our session in Prague (IETF 104), the shepherd's review of draft-ietf-bess-service-chaining [1] has identified major issues that make the document far from being ready. As the document is targeted to be standard track, the work to make it ready i

Re: [bess] WG adoption and IPR poll for draft-malhotra-bess-evpn-irb-extended-mobility-04

Hi WG, We have now a good amount of support for this document. It is adopted as a new WG item. Authors, Pls republish the document as draft-ietf-bess-evpn-irb-extended-mobility-00 Thanks From: stephane.litkow...@orange.com [mailto:stephane.litkow...@orange.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2019

Re: [bess] WG adoption and IPR poll for draft-malhotra-bess-evpn-irb-extended-mobility-04

Hi WG, Apart from the authors, we haven't received a lot of feedback for this draft (positive or negative). I would like to expand the poll to an additional week (ends at 26th March) to see if we can get more support on the list. Brgds, From: stephane.litkow...@orange.com [mailto:stephane.litk

Re: [bess] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-bess-nsh-bgp-control-plane-06

Hi Adrian, Thanks for the v09, we are now close to the end. Here are the remaining points: * NEXTHOP encoding: >>> How is the nexthop encoded in the NLRI ? >> >> A bit confused about this question. > > [SLI] I'm talking about the nexthop field of the MP_REACH_NLRI attribute, > you must set a nex

Re: [bess] WG adoption and IPR poll for draft-rabadan-sajassi-bess-evpn-ipvpn-interworking-02

Hi WG, We have now cleared the IPR poll. The document is adopted as a WG item. Authors, Please republish the document as: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-ipvpn-interworking-00 Brgds, Stephane From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of stephane.litkow...@orange.com Sent: Tuesday, March 05

Re: [bess] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-bess-nsh-bgp-control-plane-06

Hi Adrian, Thanks for the updates. More comments inline. I have trimmed the answers we have an agreement on and added some comments. Brgds, -Original Message- From: Adrian Farrel [mailto:adr...@olddog.co.uk] Sent: Friday, March 01, 2019 20:18 To: LITKOWSKI Stephane OBS/OINIS; draft-iet

Re: [bess] WG adoption and IPR poll for draft-rabadan-sajassi-bess-evpn-ipvpn-interworking-02 => MISSING IPR replies

Hi, The document has a good level of support, however I'm missing two IPR replies from Eric and Wen. Eric, Wen, Could you please reply to the IPR poll ? Thanks, From: stephane.litkow...@orange.com [mailto:stephane.litkow...@orange.com] Sent: Monday, February 18, 2019 16:53 To: draft-rabadan

[bess] WG adoption and IPR poll for draft-malhotra-bess-evpn-irb-extended-mobility-04

Hi, This email begins a two-week poll for adoption of draft-malhotra-bess-evpn-irb-extended-mobility-04 [1] Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group list. We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to this Document, to ensure that IPR

Re: [bess] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-bess-nsh-bgp-control-plane-06

Agree From: Andrew G. Malis [mailto:agma...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2019 15:21 To: LITKOWSKI Stephane OBS/OINIS Cc: draft-ietf-bess-nsh-bgp-control-pl...@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org Subject: Re: [bess] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-bess-nsh-bgp-control-plane-06 Stephane, Respondi

[bess] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-bess-nsh-bgp-control-plane-06

Hi, Here is my review of draft-ietf-bess-nsh-bgp-control-plane-06 General comment: The document is globally well written with good examples that help the understanding. However it requires some refinements in the normative language used: some statement should be normative but are not using upp

Re: [bess] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bess-nsh-bgp-control-plane-06.txt

Hi Adrian, Yes it is ready, we will proceed with the shepherd's review. However, we don't have any sign of implementation or roadmap yet, we (chairs) will have to ask the WG to determine a consensus to progress the document without an implementation (as per our implementation policy). In addit

[bess] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-bess-service-chaining-06

Hi, Here is my review of the document. Main feeling: I don't think that the document is ready to be published, especially as Standard Track is requested. The document clearly lacks of description of what should be implemented (what is optional, mandatory...) and some ambiguities/misinterpreta

[bess] WG adoption and IPR poll for draft-rabadan-sajassi-bess-evpn-ipvpn-interworking-02

This email begins a two-week poll for adoption of draft-rabadan-sajassi-bess-evpn-ipvpn-interworking-02 [1] Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group list. We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to this Document, to ensure that IPR ha

Re: [bess] new WGLC for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding-05

Hi WG, The document has been updated to fulfil the comments raised by the WG. The document is now ready to go to the next step. Brgds, From: Ali Sajassi (sajassi) [mailto:saja...@cisco.com] Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2019 03:25 To: LITKOWSKI Stephane OBS/OINIS; bess@ietf.org; draft-ietf-bess

Re: [bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for draft-ietf-bess-nsh-bgp-control-plane

Hi, The WGLC has ended. A new revision of the draft is required based on the discussions. Authors, Please publish the new revision, so we can proceed to the next step. Brgds, From: Andrew G. Malis [mailto:agma...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 28, 2019 15:37 To: John E Drake Cc: Henderickx,

Re: [bess] Poll to progress draft-ietf-bess-evpn-bum-procedure-updates without implementation

Hi WG, We haven't received any concern about progressing this document without an implementation. We will proceed accordingly. Brgds, From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of stephane.litkow...@orange.com Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2019 07:19 To: LITKOWSKI Stephane OBS/OINIS; be

[bess] Poll to progress draft-ietf-bess-evpn-bum-procedure-updates without implementation

Hi, We have now cleared the IPR poll for this draft and it is ready to progress.. We do not have implementations yet (some are in roadmap). Based on our implementation policy, we should not progress the draft. However we have "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-optimized-ir" which has a normative reference to

[bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for draft-ietf-bess-nsh-bgp-control-plane

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 any undisclosed IPR that applies to this Document, to ensure that IPR has been disc

Re: [bess] short WGLC for draft-ietf-bess-service-chaining

Hi, This new WGLC hasn't raised any concern about the document. We'll proceed to the next step. Brgds, From: stephane.litkow...@orange.com [mailto:stephane.litkow...@orange.com] Sent: Friday, January 11, 2019 09:37 To: bess@ietf.org Cc: bess-cha...@ietf.org Subject: short WGLC for draft-ietf-be

Re: [bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-virtual-eth-segment

Hi WG, The document has been updated and we have gathered all the answers regarding the IPR poll. The document will progress now to the next step. Brgds, From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of stephane.litkow...@orange.com Sent: Monday, December 17, 2018 13:55 To: LITKOWSKI St

Re: [bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-virtual-eth-segment

Hi Ali, Tim I agree almost agree with Ali. There was a 2 week WGLC to gather comments which is now ended. However, as the WGLC conclusion was that an I-D update was required, I have let time for additional updates, but we cannot continue forever. From the last set of email, I think that there

[bess] short WGLC for draft-ietf-bess-service-chaining

Hi, The draft-ietf-bess-service-chaining [1] document failed its WGLC with substantial comments received. The document has been updated beginning of December and we would like to know if people are now happy with the content of the new version. This email starts a poll of 1 week to gather addit

Re: [bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-bum-procedure-updates

Hi WG, This poll is now ended but we are missing some replies for the IPR poll. We also haven't heard about an implementation. If there is an implementation, please let us know. We will move forward after clearing this. Brgds, From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of stephane.li

Re: [bess] Poll for early allocation request for draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-evpn-aggregation-label

Hi, This poll is closed now. It seems that some discussions are required on the document, however it has been confirmed that nothing blocks the early allocation request. I'm requesting the approval from our AD now. Brgds, From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of stephane.litkow.

[bess] BESS Wiki draft

Hi WG, I have started to build a Wiki page for the BESS WG which gives a detailed status of the working group work. https://trac.ietf.org/trac/bess/wiki/WikiStart It is still a draft and I would be pleased to welcome your feedback on it on the shape as well as the content. The WG document stat

Re: [bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-virtual-eth-segment

Hi, The WGLC poll is now ended. We have one comment from Mankamana that requires a reply from the authors. We are also missing an IPR reply from Richard Schnell from Verizon. We can't proceed before clearing these two points. Brgds, Stephane From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Beha

[bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-bum-procedure-updates

Hello Working Group, This email starts a three weeks Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-bum-procedure-updates [1]. The poll period is longer than usual due to the coming vacation period. This poll runs until *the 7th of January*. We are also polling for knowledge of any und

Re: [bess] Poll for early allocation request for draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-evpn-aggregation-label

Thanks for the clarification. From: Xiejingrong [mailto:xiejingr...@huawei.com] Sent: Friday, December 14, 2018 08:20 To: LITKOWSKI Stephane OBS/OINIS; Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang; bess@ietf.org Subject: RE: Poll for early allocation request for draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-evpn-aggregation-label Hi Stephan

Re: [bess] Poll for early allocation request for draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-evpn-aggregation-label

Hi Jingrong, Speaking as co-chair, what I need to know from this discussion is if there is a blocking point for the early allocation. Yes, of course the draft will require some polishing, clarifications... as Jeffrey has mentioned, this is not a WGLC. Based on your last sentence (and the overal

[bess] Poll for early allocation request for draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-evpn-aggregation-label

Hi WG, We have received an early allocation request for the draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-evpn-aggregation-label. Please raise your concerns if you object to this request and if you think that the document is not mature enough. Feel also free to support this request. We will wait until next Monday (12/

Re: [bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-fast-failover

Hi WG, The WGLC poll is over. Authors have now to address Jeffrey's comment before moving forward. Brgds, From: stephane.litkow...@orange.com [mailto:stephane.litkow...@orange.com] Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2018 08:54 To: bess@ietf.org Cc: bess-cha...@ietf.org Subject: [bess] WGLC, IPR and

Re: [bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-virtual-eth-segment

Done, I have marked the –ietf- document replacing the individual one. The IPR is now inherited. From: Ali Sajassi (sajassi) [mailto:saja...@cisco.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2018 20:53 To: LITKOWSKI Stephane OBS/OINIS; bess@ietf.org Subject: Re: [bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for

Re: [bess] Wg Adoption and IPR poll for draft-liu-bess-mvpn-yang-07

I’m not aware of any IPR From: Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) [mailto:matthew.bo...@nokia.com] Sent: Monday, December 03, 2018 15:53 To: bess@ietf.org Cc: draft-liu-bess-mvpn-y...@ietf.org Subject: Wg Adoption and IPR poll for draft-liu-bess-mvpn-yang-07 This email begins a two-week poll for adoptio

[bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-virtual-eth-segment

Hello Working Group, This email starts a two-week Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-virtual-eth-segment [1] This poll runs until *the 17th of December*. We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to this Document, to ensure that IPR has been discl

Re: [bess] WG adoption poll for draft-zzhang-bess-mvpn-evpn-aggregation-label-01

Hi, We have now all the IPR replies. Authors, Please publish the document as draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-evpn-aggregation-label-00 Thanks ! From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of stephane.litkow...@orange.com Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2018 13:17 To: bess@ietf.org; lizhen...@huawei

[bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-fast-failover

Hello Working Group, This email starts a two-week Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-fast-failover-04 [1] This poll runs until *the 6th of December*. We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to this Document, to ensure that IPR has been disclose

[bess] PLEASE LOOK: minor change to draft-ietf-bess-evpn-df-election-framework-05 => two weeks poll to get feedback

Hi Ali, Thanks a lot for your email. Speaking as chair, could you please highlight to the working group the rationale of the change and associated use case ? Just to give the context… To WG Folks, Please review this change with care. There are two points that I would like to highlight: -

[bess] Setting up a regular WG document status update

Hi WG, In order to help the WG documents progressing faster in the WG, we have decided to request bi-monthly status update from editors of a WG document. We would like to get these status report before each IETF but also in between two IETF meetings. The status report should be sent at the foll

Re: [bess] WG adoption poll for draft-zzhang-bess-mvpn-evpn-aggregation-label-01

We have a good level of support for this document. The document is adopted as a WG document. However we are missing IPR replies from: lizhen...@huawei.com and w...@juniper.net We must clear this before proceeding. From: BESS [mailto:bess-b

[bess] WG adoption poll for draft-zzhang-bess-mvpn-evpn-aggregation-label-01

Hi WG, This email begins a two-week poll for BESS working group adoption draft-zzhang-bess-mvpn-evpn-aggregation-label-01 [1] Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group list, stating whether or not you support adoption. We are also polling for knowledge of any undi

Re: [bess] Comments on L3VPN yang

I'm also wondering if the RPF should not sit in the MPLS module as it could be used for any types of labels advertised to a neighbor. From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of stephane.litkow...@orange.com Sent: Monday, October 22, 2018 15:25 To: draft-ietf-bess-l3vpn-y...@ietf.org;

Re: [bess] Encoding a 20 bit label in a 24 bit field.

Hi, Does anyone disagree with the additional Jakob's statement proposal ? " The lower order 4 bits SHOULD be sent as 0 and ignored on receipt." As an example, in MVPN for PMSI tunnel attribute, we have the following statement which does not tell anything about the lower order bits: " If the MPLS

[bess] Comments on L3VPN yang

Hi Authors, Please find some comments on the current model: - I don't understand the "advertise-as-vpn" leaf under global-imports, what is the use case ? - Same question for "bgp-valid-route" leaf - Why do you have a long list of protocols within the global-imports ?

[bess] LxVPN and EVPN yang models

Hi Authors, Speaking as individual, after reading the last versions of your module, I still have several concerns about the consistency of the modeling across all models. There are common components between all the models that could be shared or at least modeled in the same way: - Mod

Re: [bess] Signaling Control Word in EVPN => please strip recipients

Hi Folks, We are receiving a lot of moderation requests for this topic due to the long list of recipients. Please keep only BESS list as a recipient for any further message so the message will be published automatically on the list. Thanks in advance, From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org]

Re: [bess] WG adoption poll for draft-malhotra-bess-evpn-unequal-lb-04

Hi, We have a good level of support for this document. It is adopted as a WG doc. Authors, Please republish the document as draft-ietf-bess-evpn-unequal-lb-00 Brgds, From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of stephane.litkow...@orange.com Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2018 09:29

Re: [bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for draft-ietf-bess-service-chaining

Hi WG, This WGLC pointed that some discussions are still required on this document and some old comments have not been addressed yet. Authors, Please address the comments before we can proceed with this document. Brgds, From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of stephane.litkow

[bess] WG adoption poll for draft-malhotra-bess-evpn-unequal-lb-04

Hi WG, This email begins a two-week poll for BESS working group adoption draft-malhotra-bess-evpn-unequal-lb-04 [1] Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group list, stating whether or not you support adoption. We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IP

[bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for draft-ietf-bess-service-chaining

Hello Working Group, This email starts a two-week Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-service-chaining-05 [1] This poll runs until *the 17th of September*. We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to this Document, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed

Re: [bess] new WGLC for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding-05

The document has a good level of support to progress. However there are several comments raised that have not been answered yet. Authors, Could you please address the comments that have been raised on the list (from Acee, Krysztof, and Luc Andre) ? Thanks, Stephane From: BESS [mailto:bess-

Re: [bess] WG adoption poll and IPR poll for draft-sajassi-bess-evpn-per-mcast-flow-df-election

Hi, The document has a good level of support and is adopted as a WG document. Authors, please republish the document as draft-ietf-bess-evpn-per-mcast-flow-df-election-00. Thanks, From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of stephane.litkow...@orange.com Sent: Wednesday, August 08

[bess] new WGLC for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding-05

Hello working group, This email starts a two-week Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding-05 [1]. A significant amount of update has been introduced since the previous WGLC. Please review the updates and provide your feedback. This poll runs until *the 22t

[bess] WG adoption poll and IPR poll for draft-sajassi-bess-evpn-per-mcast-flow-df-election

Hi WG, This email begins a two-week poll for BESS working group adoption of draft-sajassi-bess-evpn-per-mcast-flow-df-election-01 [1] Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group list, stating whether or not you support adoption. We are also polling for knowledge of

[bess] Full agenda for IETF 102

Hi WG, Based the slot requests that we have received, our 2h slot is already full and we may have to shrink one or two requested slots to ensure that we have to time to address all the topics. If you have requested a slot and if you are able to shrink your slot request, please advise us. Otherw

Re: [bess] New Version Notification for draft-rosen-bess-secure-l3vpn-00.txt

Hi Ron, I fully understand the case you are describing and I support this work (speaking as individual). I think it would be worth to clarify the goals/use cases and if you plan to address the use case that Robert has mentioned. Brgds, -Original Message- From: Ron Bonica [mailto:rbon.

Re: [bess] New Version Notification for draft-rosen-bess-secure-l3vpn-00.txt

Hi Robert, Thanks for sharing your point of view. I think we just have a different reading/understanding of the goals. I do not disagree with what you say. I was not seeing this as an SD-WAN like solution. At least it is not presented this way. I understood the draft as how can I overcome some

Re: [bess] New Version Notification for draft-rosen-bess-secure-l3vpn-00.txt

Hi Ron, I have read quickly the document. I think the use case of having secure L3VPNs is valid and we already have all (or most of) the technology building blocks to do it. Now the draft takes a complete upside down approach comparing to our well known L3VPNs which are provider provisioned VPNs

[bess] Slot requests for BESS WG session - IETF 102 - Montreal

All, It is time we start building the BESS WG agenda for Montreal. Please send us your request for a presentation slot, indicating draft name, speaker, and desired duration (covering presentation and discussion). If it is not the first presentation of the draft, please give a reason why it

Re: [bess] WG adoption and IPR poll for draft-sajassi-bess-evpn-fast-df-recovery-02

Hi WG, The document has a significant amount of support and we have closed the IPR poll. The document is adopted by the WG. Authors, Please republish the document as draft-ietf-bess-evpn-fast-recovery-00. Thanks ! From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of stephane.litkow...@ora

Re: [bess] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-bess-df-election-framework

Ok thanks a lot for all the edits. The text is really good now. Let me know when the next revision is ready, I will then push the button to send it to IESG. Brgds, From: Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View) [mailto:jorge.raba...@nokia.com] Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2018 14:15 To: LITKOWSKI

Re: [bess] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-bess-df-election-framework

One small comment: “this document elects a DF per . This means that unlike [RFC 7432],” s/RFC 7432/RFC7432/ This creates a Nits From: Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View) [mailto:jorge.raba...@nokia.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2018 21:36 To: LITK

[bess] WG adoption and IPR poll for draft-sajassi-bess-evpn-fast-df-recovery-02

Hi WG, This email begins a two-week poll for BESS working group adoption of draft-sajassi-bess-evpn-fast-df-recovery-02 [1]. Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group list, stating whether or not you support adoption. We are also polling for knowledge of any undis

Re: [bess] WG Last Call and IPR Poll for draft-ietf-bess-bgp-vpls-control-flags-04

Hi, This WGLC is considered as closed. We will proceed to the next step. Brgds, From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of stephane.litkow...@orange.com Sent: Monday, April 23, 2018 17:01 To: bess@ietf.org Subject: [bess] WG Last Call and IPR Poll for draft-ietf-bess-bgp-vpls-cont

Re: [bess] WG adoption and IPR poll on draft-liu-bess-mvpn-yang-05

Hi, Just to let you know that this poll has been closed. From: Zhuangshunwan [mailto:zhuangshun...@huawei.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 12:55 To: LITKOWSKI Stephane OBS/OINIS; bess@ietf.org Subject: RE: WG adoption and IPR poll on draft-liu-bess-mvpn-yang-05 Support adoption. Thanks Shunw

[bess] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-bess-df-election-framework

Hi, Here is my review of the document: General comments: - - The document requires sometimes to be more generic as it describes a flexible framework for DF election rather than focusing on default election or HRW. See detailed comments. - The new FSM

[bess] WG Last Call and IPR Poll for draft-ietf-bess-bgp-vpls-control-flags-04

Hi WG, This email begins a two-week working group last call for draft-ietf-bess-bgp-vpls-control-flags-04 [1] Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group list. We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to this Document, to ensure that IPR

Re: [bess] WG adoption and IPR poll on draft-liu-bess-mvpn-yang-05

Hi, Unfortunately we haven't received any positive or negative feedback on this draft. As there is no established consensus, the draft cannot be adopted as a WG item. However, the BESS WG needs a YANG model for mvpn as for other VPN services, so I'm a bit surprised that there was no support (ev

Re: [bess] WG adoption and IPR poll on draft-liu-bess-mvpn-yang-05

Hi WG, This is a gentle reminder that this poll is currently running. We have not received any feedback yet, while it sounds mandatory for BESS to have a YANG model for mVPNs. Please reply to this poll with support or not support. Brgds, From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of

Re: [bess] Short WGLC, IPR poll, implementation policy relax poll on draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-expl-track-08

Hi WG, No additional comments/concern were raised during this short WGLC. No concern was also raised to progress this document without having implementations. I'll do the write-up asap then the draft will progress to the next step. Brgds, From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of

Re: [bess] REMINDER: Poll to park almost dead WG documents

Hi WG, During this polling, we have received a single feedback on a document with the willingness of progressing it (draft-ietf-l3vpn-end-system). Unfortunately, we cannot consider that we have a rough consensus from the WG to go forward. As a consequence, all the WG documents listed below will

Re: [bess] WGLC on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-df-election-framework

Hi WG, We have seen a very good support to make this draft progressing. Unfortunately we are still waiting for some IPR answers (mostly contributors). I have advised the required people to answer. In the meantime I will start the shepherd's review. Brgds, From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.

[bess] Short WGLC, IPR poll, implementation policy relax poll on draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-expl-track-08

Hello working group, This email starts a one week Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-expl-track-08 [1]. As the document has already passed a WGLC and some issues were fixed as part of the shepherd's review, this WGLC poll is shorter than regular ones. This poll runs until *the

[bess] WG adoption and IPR poll on draft-liu-bess-mvpn-yang-05

This email begins a two-week poll for BESS working group adoption of draft-liu-bess-mvpn-yang -05 [1]. Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group list, stating whether or not you support adoption. We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies

  1   2   >