Thanks for the feedback!
Let’s move ahead.
Thomas
On 16.01.18, 22:36, "Gert Doering" wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 03:40:16PM +, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> I wouldn't see a problem mentioning LAGs in a future -bis, but as others
> have noted, there doesn't seem to be a
to move ahead and add the proposed changes on
an update of the BCP I will definitely contribute.
Best regards,
Thomas
On 15.01.18, 19:34, "Job Snijders" wrote:
On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 06:11:26PM +0000, Thomas King wrote:
> any update on this?
Hi Thomas,
Hi guys,
any update on this?
Best regards,
Thomas
On 11.01.18, 22:34, "GROW on behalf of Thomas King" wrote:
Hi Job,
On 09.01.18, 16:50, "Job Snijders" wrote:
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 03:34:46PM +, Will Hargrave wrote:
> On 9
Hi Job,
On 09.01.18, 16:50, "Job Snijders" wrote:
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 03:34:46PM +, Will Hargrave wrote:
> On 9 Jan 2018, at 11:35, Job Snijders wrote:
> > > Our suggestion for handling LAGs looks like this: Typically, a
> > > minimum number of port members can be defined
Hi Will,
I know of many IXPs utilising Multi-Chassis LAGs.
Best regards,
Thomas
From: Will Hargrave
Date: Tuesday, 9. January 2018 at 16:34
To: Job Snijders
Cc: Thomas King , "grow@ietf.org" ,
"draft-ietf-grow-bgp-session-cull...@ietf.org"
Subject: Re: [GROW] Handling o
Hi Job,
On 09.01.18, 12:35, "Job Snijders" wrote:
Dear Thomas,
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 11:30:35AM +0000, Thomas King wrote:
> we at DE-CIX are currently implementing BGP Session Culling and we hit
> the question how to handle LAGs (e.g. LACP, Static
Hi all,
we at DE-CIX are currently implementing BGP Session Culling and we hit the
question how to handle LAGs (e.g. LACP, Static configured). The Internet Draft
is not covering this question yet, however, from our point of view it is worth
discussing it.
Our suggestion for handling LAGs looks
Hi all,
here is the summary of DE-CIX Tech Meeting [0] where I presented the BGP
Session Culling approach [1]:
The attendees appreciate the BGP session culling process as such and also the
standardization of the maintenance procedures of different IXPs that will
hopefully follow. The attendees
t-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Global Routing Operations of the IETF.
Title : BLACKHOLE BGP Community for Blackholing
Authors : Thomas King
Christoph Dietzel
Hi Christopher,
I am not aware of any IPR issue.
Best regards,
Thomas
From: Christopher Morrow
Date: Monday 13 June 2016 at 10:29
To: Thomas King ,
"draft-ietf-grow-blackhol...@ietf.org"
Cc: "grow@ietf.org grow@ietf.org" , "grow-cha...@ietf.org"
, "gr
Hi Christopher,
thanks for the update.
There are no edits due so please proceed.
Best regards,
Thomas
From: GROW on behalf of Christopher Morrow
Date: Wednesday 8 June 2016 at 22:47
To: "grow@ietf.org grow@ietf.org" , "grow-cha...@ietf.org"
, "grow-...@tools.ietf.org"
Subject: Re: [GROW]
Hi Jeff,
On 10/05/2016, 22:31, "GROW on behalf of Jeffrey Haas" wrote:
>On Fri, May 06, 2016 at 10:51:46AM -0400, Christopher Morrow wrote:
>> The authors of: draft-ietf-grow-blackholing had asked for WGLC to be
>> started on their document. The abstract is:
>>
>>This document describes t
Hi GROW WG,
I just resubmitted the draft as a WG document.
As indicated by the chairs during the WG meeting (during IETF 94) I aim for a
last call right before the next IETF meeting. So, I kindly ask anybody
interested in the topic to read the document and provide comments / requests /
feedba
___
> GROW mailing list
> GROW@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
--
Dr. Thomas King
Manager Research & Development
DE-CIX Management GmbH | Lindleystraße 12 | 60314 Frankfurt am Main | Germany |
www.de-cix.net |
Phone +49
Hi all,
I support this draft as Add-Path is important as well as MRT is.
Best regards,
Thomas
> On 2 Nov 2015, at 15:48, Christopher Morrow
> wrote:
>
> Howdy WG folks,
>
> Please consider this the start of a 3 week Adoption call for the noted
> draft who's abstract is:
> "This document up
Hi Grow WG,
as already announced during IETF 93 I would like to ask for WG adoption for
this I-D.
Best regards,
Thomas
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
GROW mailing list
GROW@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/
> On 28 Jul 2015, at 17:34, Jeffrey Haas wrote:
…
> One thing I'd recommend for the draft is explicit discussion about the scope
> of the community and its expected propagation characteristics.
I just uploaded a revised version of the draft. It contains an overhauled
section 3 (Operational Re
29 Jul 2015, at 19:18, internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote:
>
>
> A new version of I-D, draft-ymbk-grow-blackholing-01.txt
> has been successfully submitted by Thomas King and posted to the
> IETF repository.
>
> Name: draft-ymbk-grow-blackholing
> Revision: 01
> T
> On 23 Jul 2015, at 13:23, Jon Mitchell wrote:
>
>
>
>
>> On Jul 20, 2015, at 7:05 PM, Geoff Huston wrote:
>>
>> Comment at the mic from today’s GROW session:
>>
>> Please be mindful of “prior art” (as Joel Jaggeli described it) regarding
>> the use of AS65535.
>>
>> RFC7300 http://tool
Hi all,
> On 2 Jul 2015, at 17:19, Christopher Morrow
> wrote:
>
> howdy!
> we've requested a meeting slot for Prague, I think it'd be good to
> chat about these items at least:
…
> Specifically I think the blackholing folk are interested in WG
> Adoption, and direction…
I would like to give
Hi Job et all,
> On 26 Jun 2015, at 21:27, Job Snijders wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 06:27:23PM +0000, Thomas King wrote:
>>> Another remark, should you decide to rename BLACKHOLEIXP to just
>>> BLACKHOLE, you might want to replace the references to "IXP&
Hi Job et al,
> On 26 Jun 2015, at 19:13, Job Snijders wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 08:51:40PM +0000, Thomas King wrote:
>> we submitted this document in order to unify and simplify triggering
>> blackholing at IXPs. We propose to define a well-known BGP community
&g
Hi Jeffrey et all,
> On 15 Jun 2015, at 21:30, Jeffrey Haas wrote:
…
> I'm generally supportive of this draft. The Security Considerations cover
> the majority of the issues this standardized blackhole community introduces.
Thanks for your feedback.
> I would suggest one additional considera
Hi Everybody,
we submitted this document in order to unify and simplify triggering
blackholing at IXPs. We propose to define a well-known BGP community for this.
Any feedback is highly appreciated.
Best regards,
Thomas
> On 28 May 2015, at 20:59, internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote:
>
>
> A new
24 matches
Mail list logo
