[Lsr] Deborah Brungard's Discuss on draft-ietf-isis-te-app-14: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Deborah Brungard has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-isis-te-app-14: Discuss When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https:

[Lsr] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-isis-te-app-14: (with COMMENT)

Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-isis-te-app-14: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to http

[Lsr] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-14: (with COMMENT)

Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-14: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please r

[Lsr] Deborah Brungard's Discuss on draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-14: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Deborah Brungard has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-14: Discuss When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please ref

[Lsr] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-14: (with COMMENT)

Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-14: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please r

[Lsr] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-isis-te-app-14: (with COMMENT)

Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-isis-te-app-14: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to http

Re: [Lsr] WG adoption call for draft-przygienda-lsr-flood-reflection-01

JNPR holds relevant IPR on the draft. We are in the process of disclosing it ASAP thanks -- tony On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 12:29 PM Christian Hopps wrote: > This begins a 2 week WG adoption call for the following draft: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-przygienda-lsr-flood-reflection

Re: [Lsr] WG adoption call for draft-przygienda-lsr-flood-reflection-01

> Authors, please respond to the list indicating whether you are aware of any > IPR that applies to this draft. I am not a lawyer nor an author, but the area proxy IPR filing (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/4016/ ) may also apply to this draft. Tony

Re: [Lsr] WG adoption call for draft-li-lsr-isis-area-proxy-06

> On Jun 10, 2020, at 12:27 PM, Christian Hopps wrote: > > This begins a 2 week WG adoption call for the following draft: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-lsr-isis-area-proxy/ > > The draft would be adopted on the Experimental track. > > Please indicate your support or objectio

Re: [Lsr] WG adoption call for draft-przygienda-lsr-flood-reflection-01

Christian, thanks much for that. As there were already two different threads over last months where a good amount of people/companies expressed their support for the draft to progress as WG item, I don't expect to need to pester them again but maybe more will chime in here ... thanks -- tony On

[Lsr] WG adoption call for draft-przygienda-lsr-flood-reflection-01

This begins a 2 week WG adoption call for the following draft: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-przygienda-lsr-flood-reflection The draft would be adopted on the Experimental track. Please indicate your support or objection by June 24, 2020. Authors, please respond to the list indicatin

[Lsr] WG adoption call for draft-li-lsr-isis-area-proxy-06

This begins a 2 week WG adoption call for the following draft: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-lsr-isis-area-proxy/ The draft would be adopted on the Experimental track. Please indicate your support or objection by June 24, 2020. Authors, please respond to the list indicating whethe

[Lsr] Multiple adoption calls

Hi Folks, The WG is being presented with multiple solutions to a similar problem in the Area Proxy and Flood Reflector drafts. Both sets of authors plan to ship an implementation and are seeking early allocation of code points to do so. The Expert Reviewers have indicated they wish to see the W

Re: [Lsr] Thoughts on the area proxy and flood reflector drafts.

> On Jun 10, 2020, at 2:10 PM, Tony Przygienda wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 11:04 AM Christian Hopps wrote: > > > > > > I also suggest to look up why in PNNI we ended up introducing a special "L1 > > equivalent" computation to the peer group leader to validate that it was

Re: [Lsr] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-12

Peter, Thank you for the explanation. Linda -Original Message- From: Peter Psenak Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2020 3:40 AM To: Linda Dunbar ; Acee Lindem (acee) ; gen-...@ietf.org Cc: last-c...@ietf.org; draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse@ietf.org; lsr@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Lsr

Re: [Lsr] Thoughts on the area proxy and flood reflector drafts.

On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 11:04 AM Christian Hopps wrote: > > ... > > > > I also suggest to look up why in PNNI we ended up introducing a special > "L1 equivalent" computation to the peer group leader to validate that it > was actually reachable for correct operation (especially hierarchy > negotia

Re: [Lsr] Thoughts on the area proxy and flood reflector drafts.

> On Jun 10, 2020, at 1:56 PM, Tony Przygienda wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 10:29 AM Christian Hopps wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hmmm, AFAIR the implementation of OSPF virtual links was having no tunnel > > at all (and that's how I remember I implemented it then). I cite > >

Re: [Lsr] Thoughts on the area proxy and flood reflector drafts.

On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 10:29 AM Christian Hopps wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hmmm, AFAIR the implementation of OSPF virtual links was having no > tunnel at all (and that's how I remember I implemented it then). I cite > > Correct, that's why I'm suggesting that any solution without tunnels is > goin

Re: [Lsr] Thoughts on the area proxy and flood reflector drafts.

> On Jun 10, 2020, at 12:40 PM, Tony Przygienda wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 4:27 AM Christian Hopps wrote: > > > > On Jun 9, 2020, at 10:01 PM, Tony Przygienda wrote: > > > > Chris (addressing in WG member context you declared), I reply tersely since > > we will put more wor

Re: [Lsr] Thoughts on the area proxy and flood reflector drafts.

ok, let's not drag vendor specific stuff in. I shouldn't have brought it up I guess, outside the scope of IETF threads ... thanks --- tony On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 10:23 AM wrote: > > Tony, > > > On Jun 10, 2020, at 9:40 AM, Tony Przygienda wrote: > > You do seem to be carrying as WG member a

Re: [Lsr] Thoughts on the area proxy and flood reflector drafts.

Tony, > On Jun 10, 2020, at 9:40 AM, Tony Przygienda wrote: > > You do seem to be carrying as WG member a hot torch for area-proxy for some > reason, that's fine with me, frankly, I had extensive discussions with > customers when DriveNet was being proposed to them (which AFAIS is basically

Re: [Lsr] Robert Wilton's Discuss on draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-14: (with DISCUSS)

Hi Alvaro, > -Original Message- > From: Alvaro Retana > Sent: 10 June 2020 16:49 > To: Rob Wilton (rwilton) > Cc: Acee Lindem (acee) ; draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr- > re...@ietf.org; lsr-cha...@ietf.org; lsr@ietf.org; Yingzhen Qu > ; The IESG > Subject: Re: Robert Wilton's Discuss on d

Re: [Lsr] Thoughts on the area proxy and flood reflector drafts.

On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 4:27 AM Christian Hopps wrote: > > > > On Jun 9, 2020, at 10:01 PM, Tony Przygienda > wrote: > > > > Chris (addressing in WG member context you declared), I reply tersely > since we will put more work into the draft once it's adopted (for which I > think you saw a good am

Re: [Lsr] Robert Wilton's No Objection on draft-ietf-isis-te-app-14: (with COMMENT)

Rob - Thanx for your review. Inline. > -Original Message- > From: Robert Wilton via Datatracker > Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2020 8:38 AM > To: The IESG > Cc: draft-ietf-isis-te-...@ietf.org; lsr-cha...@ietf.org; lsr@ietf.org; Acee > Lindem (acee) ; aretana.i...@gmail.com; Acee Lindem >

Re: [Lsr] Robert Wilton's No Objection on draft-ietf-isis-te-app-14: (with COMMENT)

Rob: Hi! I just replied to your review of the OSPF document…making the same suggestion. :-) Thanks! Alvaro. On June 10, 2020 at 11:37:36 AM, Robert Wilton via Datatracker ( nore...@ietf.org) wrote: Robert Wilton has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-isis-te-app-14: No Obje

Re: [Lsr] Robert Wilton's Discuss on draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-14: (with DISCUSS)

On June 10, 2020 at 10:32:09 AM, Robert Wilton wrote: Rob: Hi! Thanks for the review. I’m replying for the authors as I think that your questions/suggestions should be easy to address.  Please see below. Thanks! Alvaro. > --

[Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-decraene-lsr-isis-flooding-speed-04.txt

Hi WG, Following our presentation at the latest LSR interim meeting, we have updated the draft as presented and discussed during the meeting. High level changes are: o Adding general introduction on flow control, congestion control, loss detection and recovery. o Reorganizing sections

[Lsr] Robert Wilton's No Objection on draft-ietf-isis-te-app-14: (with COMMENT)

Robert Wilton has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-isis-te-app-14: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to http

[Lsr] Robert Wilton's Discuss on draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-14: (with DISCUSS)

Robert Wilton has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-14: Discuss When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer

Re: [Lsr] Thoughts on the area proxy and flood reflector drafts.

> On Jun 9, 2020, at 10:01 PM, Tony Przygienda wrote: > > Chris (addressing in WG member context you declared), I reply tersely since > we will put more work into the draft once it's adopted (for which I think you > saw a good amount of support in two threads already). > > I deferred from

Re: [Lsr] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-12

Linda, On 09/06/2020 22:20, Linda Dunbar wrote: Peter, Thank you for the explanation. So you are saying that a node might not support RSVP or RSVP-TE, but can advertise the TE related attributes for SR purpose. When the head node receiving the advertisement also support RSVP-TE, it might us