gds,
From: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) [mailto:ginsb...@cisco.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2017 20:06
To: LITKOWSKI Stephane OBS/OINIS; DECRAENE Bruno IMT/OLN; Shraddha Hegde;
spring@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [spring] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
Stephane -
I think it is importan
ugust 02, 2017 1:09 AM
To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); DECRAENE Bruno IMT/OLN; Shraddha Hegde;
spring@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [spring] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
No it's not, it's definitely not enough precise.
Telling that you include all the entries (from all prot
y, August 02, 2017 10:38
To: LITKOWSKI Stephane OBS/OINIS; Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); DECRAENE Bruno
IMT/OLN; Shraddha Hegde; spring@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [spring] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
Hi,
N, N1 and N2 advertise SRGB [1000,2000] in OSPF and SRGB [2000,3000] in ISIS.
IM
; Shraddha Hegde;
spring@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [spring] WG Last Call for
draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
Bruno –
Please reread
“Section 3.7. Guaranteeing Database
ng [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Les Ginsberg
(ginsberg)
Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2017 00:25
To: DECRAENE Bruno IMT/OLN; Shraddha Hegde;
spring@ietf.org<mailto:spring@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [spring] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
Bruno -
Please rere
01, 2017 6:24 AM
To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); spring@ietf.org
Cc: LITKOWSKI Stephane OBS/OINIS; Shraddha Hegde
Subject: RE: [spring] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
Regarding the existence of multiple protocols/LSDB, section 2 related to SRGB
seems to be light on this
orange.com [mailto:stephane.litkow...@orange.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2017 1:28 AM
To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); DECRAENE Bruno IMT/OLN; Shraddha Hegde;
spring@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [spring] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
Hi Les,
There is something unclear to me here.
Let's
,
--Bruno
From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
stephane.litkow...@orange.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2017 10:28 AM
To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); DECRAENE Bruno IMT/OLN; Shraddha Hegde;
spring@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [spring] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
s Ginsberg
(ginsberg)
Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2017 00:25
To: DECRAENE Bruno IMT/OLN; Shraddha Hegde; spring@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [spring] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
Bruno -
Please reread "Section 3.7. Guaranteeing Database Consistency.".
The draft is ex
will also look into this.
Les
From: Shraddha Hegde [mailto:shrad...@juniper.net]
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2017 10:27 AM
To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); spring@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [spring] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
Les,
When the protocol preference is different ac
e for details...
Rgds
Shraddha
From: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) [mailto:ginsb...@cisco.com]
Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2017 3:48 AM
To: Shraddha Hegde ; spring@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [spring] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
Shraddha -
Protocol preference (commonly known as
Les,
From: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) [mailto:ginsb...@cisco.com]
Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2017 12:25 AM
To: DECRAENE Bruno IMT/OLN; Shraddha Hegde; spring@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [spring] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
Bruno -
Please reread "Section 3.7. Guarant
tabases for conflict resolution.
Les
From: bruno.decra...@orange.com [mailto:bruno.decra...@orange.com]
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2017 3:43 AM
To: Shraddha Hegde; Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); spring@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [spring] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
Always as an in
esday, July 25, 2017 1:57 AM
To: Shraddha Hegde mailto:shrad...@juniper.net>>;
spring@ietf.org<mailto:spring@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: [spring] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
Shraddha -
Thanx for the comments - responses inline.
> -Original Message-
alf Of Shraddha Hegde
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2017 5:31 AM
To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); spring@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [spring] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
Thanks for the response.
It is important to keep the network functioning correctly in case of
transitioning from
@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [spring] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
Shraddha -
Thanx for the comments - responses inline.
> -Original Message-
> From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Shraddha Hegde
> Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 11:44
inimize the use of conflicting SIDs for
inter-area traffic. What is lacking in the draft is a statement that
conflicting SIDs should not be leaked out of an area. I will work on a
statement in the draft to make that point clear.
Thanx for bringing this issue up.
Les
>
>
@nic.dtag.de]
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2017 8:22 PM
To: spring@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [spring] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
Strong support from me, too.
From an operator's point of view this is really needed.
Best regards, Martin
Am 10.07.17 um 14:58 schrieb Marti
Strong support from me, too.
From an operator's point of view this is really needed.
Best regards, Martin
Am 10.07.17 um 14:58 schrieb Martin Vigoureux:
WG,
We are half-way through the WG Last Call and I am very surprised to
only see a single answer to it.
I am not sure I'll move this fo
half Of Acee Lindem
>> (acee)
>> Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2017 12:02 PM
>> To: bruno.decra...@orange.com; Martin Vigoureux
>> Cc: spring@ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: [spring] WG Last Call for
>>draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
>>
>> I fully support this doc
c: spring@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [spring] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
>
> I fully support this document and, now that we have reached consensus,
> believe we should publish it before anyone changes their minds…
>
> I have reviewed the -05 version and hav
ncluding a simplified procedure disregarding all
>conflicting entries.
>
>Thanks,
>Regards,
>--Bruno
> > -Original Message-
> > From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Martin
>Vigoureux
> > Sent: Monday, July 10, 2017 2:58 PM
> > To: spr
day, July 10, 2017 2:58 PM
> To: spring@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [spring] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
>
> WG,
>
> We are half-way through the WG Last Call and I am very surprised to only
> see a single answer to it.
>
> I am not sure I&#
Support as co-author.
I am not aware of any IPR relevant to this draft.
Peter
On 10/07/17 14:58 , Martin Vigoureux wrote:
WG,
We are half-way through the WG Last Call and I am very surprised to only
see a single answer to it.
I am not sure I'll move this forward with only silence as support.
Yes/support
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 23:00 wrote:
> Hello Martin,
> I support the draft as co-author. I am not aware of any relevant IPR.
> Thanks,
> Martin
>
> On 07/10/2017 02:58 PM, Martin Vigoureux wrote:
> > WG,
> >
> > We are half-way through the WG Last Call and I am very surprised to only
Hello Martin,
I support the draft as co-author. I am not aware of any relevant IPR.
Thanks,
Martin
On 07/10/2017 02:58 PM, Martin Vigoureux wrote:
WG,
We are half-way through the WG Last Call and I am very surprised to only
see a single answer to it.
I am not sure I'll move this forward with
Support.
Thanks,
Nagendra
On 6/29/17, 9:28 AM, "spring on behalf of Martin Vigoureux"
wrote:
Hello Working Group,
This email starts a Working Group Last Call on
draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution-04 [1] which is considered mature
and ready for a final working group re
+1
Support the publication of this draft.
Regards,
Gaurav
On 7/10/17, 7:12 AM, "spring on behalf of stefano previdi"
wrote:
I strongly support the publication of this draft.
I’m not aware of any IPR related to the mechanisms described in the draft.
s.
>
ng@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [spring] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
>
> WG,
>
> We are half-way through the WG Last Call and I am very surprised to only see
> a single answer to it.
>
> I am not sure I'll move this forward with only silence
I strongly support the publication of this draft.
I’m not aware of any IPR related to the mechanisms described in the draft.
s.
> On Jun 29, 2017, at 3:28 PM, Martin Vigoureux
> wrote:
>
> Hello Working Group,
>
> This email starts a Working Group Last Call on
> draft-ietf-spring-conflict
WG,
We are half-way through the WG Last Call and I am very surprised to only
see a single answer to it.
I am not sure I'll move this forward with only silence as support.
-m
Le 29/06/2017 à 15:28, Martin Vigoureux a écrit :
Hello Working Group,
This email starts a Working Group Last Call o
yes/support
Cheers,
Jeff
On 6/29/17, 06:28, "spring on behalf of Martin Vigoureux"
wrote:
Hello Working Group,
This email starts a Working Group Last Call on
draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution-04 [1] which is considered mature
and ready for a final working group r
Hello Working Group,
This email starts a Working Group Last Call on
draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution-04 [1] which is considered mature
and ready for a final working group review.
¤ Please read this document if you haven't read the most recent
version yet, and send your comments to the li
33 matches
Mail list logo
