Aijun -
Since advertising some sort of capability would also be unusable until all
routers were upgraded to understand the new capability advertisement this does
not help. 😊
The consequences of enabling a form of authentication which is not supported by
all nodes is an inconsistent LSPDB -
Hi, Huaimo:
Thanks for your review. After the holiday, let’s begin the discussion.
Your understanding for generating the PUA(Prefix Unreachable Announcement)
is correct, but the process for stop the PUA is not the way that we
proposed.
In theory, the ABR will send the PUA once when it notice
Is there any method to indicate or negotiate the support of
ISO10589/RFC5304/RFC6233 because they are not back compatible?
What will be the consequence when not all of the routers within the IGP
domain support the same RFC?
Will it valuable to add more clarification for the above incompatible
scena
yes/support
Happy New Year all!
Cheers,
Jeff
On Jan 2, 2020, 11:07 AM -0800, Christian Hopps , wrote:
> This begins a 2 week WG Last Call, ending after Jan 16th, 2020, for
> draft-ietf-lsr-isis-invalid-tlv.
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsr-isis-invalid-tlv/
>
> Tony P (other a
As co-author:
This is only 20 years overdue. Ship it already. :-)
T
> On Jan 2, 2020, at 11:06 AM, Christian Hopps wrote:
>
> This begins a 2 week WG Last Call, ending after Jan 16th, 2020, for
> draft-ietf-lsr-isis-invalid-tlv.
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsr-isis
No knowledge of any undisclosed IPR
On 1/2/20, 11:40 AM, "Paul Wells" wrote:
Support (as co-author).
Thanks,
Paul
On 1/2/20 2:06 PM, Christian Hopps wrote:
> This begins a 2 week WG Last Call, ending after Jan 16th, 2020, for
> draft-ietf-lsr-isis-invalid-tlv.
Support (as co-author).
Thanks,
Paul
On 1/2/20 2:06 PM, Christian Hopps wrote:
This begins a 2 week WG Last Call, ending after Jan 16th, 2020, for
draft-ietf-lsr-isis-invalid-tlv.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsr-isis-invalid-tlv/
Tony P (other authors already responded duri
Support +1 obviously
--- tony
On 1/2/20, 11:35 AM, "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" wrote:
As co-author, I obviously support moving the draft forward.
The impetus for writing the draft was a real world interoperability problem
- so there should be no debate about whether the draft is
As co-author, I obviously support moving the draft forward.
The impetus for writing the draft was a real world interoperability problem -
so there should be no debate about whether the draft is needed.
All parties involved in the problem have actively participated in writing the
draft - so I thi
Speaking as WG Member:
I support publication. This is document fills a long-standing gap in the IS-IS
specification.
Thanks,
Acee
On 1/2/20, 2:09 PM, "Lsr on behalf of Christian Hopps" wrote:
This begins a 2 week WG Last Call, ending after Jan 16th, 2020, for
draft-ietf-lsr-isis-invali
This begins a 2 week WG Last Call, ending after Jan 16th, 2020, for
draft-ietf-lsr-isis-invalid-tlv.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsr-isis-invalid-tlv/
Tony P (other authors already responded during the adoption poll), please
indicate your knowledge of any IPR related to this w
A new meeting session request has just been submitted by Acee Lindem, a Chair
of the lsr working group.
-
Working Group Name: Link State Routing
Area Name: Routing Area
Session Requester: Acee Lindem
Number of Sessions: 2
Length of Sess
12 matches
Mail list logo