Hi Alanna, I see that in section 4 and 5, "MPLS" was added before "Encapsulation sub-TLV". That should not be done - the existing wording applies to both MPLS and non-MPLS Encapsulation sub-TLV. If necessary, you can say "MPLS or non-MPLS Encapsulation sub-TLV".
Thanks. Jeffrey Juniper Business Use Only -----Original Message----- From: Alanna Paloma <apal...@staff.rfc-editor.org> Sent: Friday, June 6, 2025 1:25 PM To: xuxia...@cmss.chinamobile.com; mach.c...@huawei.com; ke...@arrcus.com; i...@braindump.be; Antoni Przygienda <p...@juniper.net>; Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang <zzh...@juniper.net> Cc: rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org; bier-...@ietf.org; bier-cha...@ietf.org; chen....@zte.com.cn; gunter.van_de_ve...@nokia.com; auth48archive@rfc-editor.org Subject: Re: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9793 <draft-ietf-bier-idr-extensions-19> for your review [External Email. Be cautious of content] Authors, This is a friendly reminder that we await your reviews and approvals of the updated files. We will await approvals from each party listed on the AUTH48 status page below prior to moving this document forward in the publication process. The files have been posted here (please refresh): https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9793.xml__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!HcMPo3GfNKhUuDWZ9KLz_3Hi4QoiFsqpigGABMP_UH7k-L89VDPhD9qzA0k3V8croYABgvEEahFswRw1LTRkP4J_rg$ https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9793.txt__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!HcMPo3GfNKhUuDWZ9KLz_3Hi4QoiFsqpigGABMP_UH7k-L89VDPhD9qzA0k3V8croYABgvEEahFswRw1LTSvcMTvmQ$ https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9793.html__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!HcMPo3GfNKhUuDWZ9KLz_3Hi4QoiFsqpigGABMP_UH7k-L89VDPhD9qzA0k3V8croYABgvEEahFswRw1LTTO-THXdw$ https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9793.pdf__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!HcMPo3GfNKhUuDWZ9KLz_3Hi4QoiFsqpigGABMP_UH7k-L89VDPhD9qzA0k3V8croYABgvEEahFswRw1LTSFK2imLw$ The relevant diff files have been posted here: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9793-diff.html__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!HcMPo3GfNKhUuDWZ9KLz_3Hi4QoiFsqpigGABMP_UH7k-L89VDPhD9qzA0k3V8croYABgvEEahFswRw1LTSpqctNWw$ (comprehensive diff) https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9793-auth48diff.html__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!HcMPo3GfNKhUuDWZ9KLz_3Hi4QoiFsqpigGABMP_UH7k-L89VDPhD9qzA0k3V8croYABgvEEahFswRw1LTS_c4zfOg$ (AUTH48 changes) For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9793__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!HcMPo3GfNKhUuDWZ9KLz_3Hi4QoiFsqpigGABMP_UH7k-L89VDPhD9qzA0k3V8croYABgvEEahFswRw1LTRKxj6t8A$ Thank you, RFC Editor/ap > On May 30, 2025, at 11:08 AM, Alanna Paloma <apal...@staff.rfc-editor.org> > wrote: > > Hi Jeffrey, > > Thank you for your reply. We have updated the files accordingly. > > The files have been posted here (please refresh): > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9793 > .xml__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!HcMPo3GfNKhUuDWZ9KLz_3Hi4QoiFsqpigGABMP_UH7k-L89V > DPhD9qzA0k3V8croYABgvEEahFswRw1LTRkP4J_rg$ > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9793 > .txt__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!HcMPo3GfNKhUuDWZ9KLz_3Hi4QoiFsqpigGABMP_UH7k-L89V > DPhD9qzA0k3V8croYABgvEEahFswRw1LTSvcMTvmQ$ > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9793 > .html__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!HcMPo3GfNKhUuDWZ9KLz_3Hi4QoiFsqpigGABMP_UH7k-L89 > VDPhD9qzA0k3V8croYABgvEEahFswRw1LTTO-THXdw$ > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9793 > .pdf__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!HcMPo3GfNKhUuDWZ9KLz_3Hi4QoiFsqpigGABMP_UH7k-L89V > DPhD9qzA0k3V8croYABgvEEahFswRw1LTSFK2imLw$ > > The relevant diff files have been posted here: > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9793 > -diff.html__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!HcMPo3GfNKhUuDWZ9KLz_3Hi4QoiFsqpigGABMP_UH7 > k-L89VDPhD9qzA0k3V8croYABgvEEahFswRw1LTSpqctNWw$ (comprehensive diff) > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9793 > -auth48diff.html__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!HcMPo3GfNKhUuDWZ9KLz_3Hi4QoiFsqpigGAB > MP_UH7k-L89VDPhD9qzA0k3V8croYABgvEEahFswRw1LTS_c4zfOg$ (AUTH48 > changes) > > Please review the document carefully and contact us with any further updates > you may have. Note that we do not make changes once a document is published > as an RFC. > > We will await approvals from each party listed on the AUTH48 status page > below prior to moving this document forward in the publication process. > > For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see: > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9793_ > _;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!HcMPo3GfNKhUuDWZ9KLz_3Hi4QoiFsqpigGABMP_UH7k-L89VDPhD9 > qzA0k3V8croYABgvEEahFswRw1LTRKxj6t8A$ > > Thank you, > RFC Editor/ap > >> On May 29, 2025, at 7:26 PM, Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang >> <zzhang=40juniper....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> Please see zzh> below. >> >> >> Juniper Business Use Only >> -----Original Message----- >> From: rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org <rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2025 8:20 PM >> To: xuxia...@cmss.chinamobile.com; mach.c...@huawei.com; >> ke...@arrcus.com; i...@braindump.be; Antoni Przygienda >> <p...@juniper.net>; Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang <zzh...@juniper.net> >> Cc: rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org; bier-...@ietf.org; >> bier-cha...@ietf.org; chen....@zte.com.cn; >> gunter.van_de_ve...@nokia.com; auth48archive@rfc-editor.org >> Subject: Re: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9793 >> <draft-ietf-bier-idr-extensions-19> for your review >> >> [External Email. Be cautious of content] >> >> >> Authors, >> >> While reviewing this document during AUTH48, please resolve (as necessary) >> the following questions, which are also in the XML file. >> >> 1) <!--[rfced] Please note that the title of the document has been updated >> as follows. >> Abbreviations have been expanded per Section 3.6 of RFC 7322 ("RFC Style >> Guide"). >> Please review. >> >> Original: >> BGP Extensions for BIER >> >> Current: >> BGP Extensions for Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER) >> --> >> >> Zzh> Ack. >> >> 2) <!-- [rfced] Please insert any keywords (beyond those that appear >> in the title) for use on >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/search__;!!NEt >> 6yMaO-gk!BJ6v2FOBd8VGkYJHlaHgnjGegvKzbIUfYyr46UWCbnU9e0rwA4mbmmtftAPg >> 1aih3Jvh2GZMI2a16x_qopTsnJnq$ . --> >> >> >> 3) <!--[rfced] We see these two similar sentences in the Abstract and >> Introduction. May we update the sentence from the Introduction to match the >> one from the Abstract? >> >> Zzh> Sure. >> >> Abstract: >> This document describes BGP extensions for advertising the BIER >> information and methods for calculating BIER states based on the >> advertisements. >> >> Introduction: >> This document describes BGP extensions for advertising the >> BIER-specific information and the methods for calculating BIER >> forwarding states with this information. >> --> >> >> >> 4) <!--[rfced] FYI - We moved the Requirements Language paragraph to the >> Terminology section per the RFC Style Guide; see Section 4 of RFC 7322. >> --> >> >> Zzh> Sure. >> >> 5) <!--[rfced] FYI - We note a mix of "one-octet" vs. "1-octet" and "two >> octets" vs. "2 octets". We updated the document to use the numeral form for >> consistency. >> --> >> >> Zzh> Thanks. >> >> 6) <!--[rfced] Should a citation be added for the quoted text below? Or may >> we remove the quotation marks? >> >> Zzh> Please remove the quotation marks. >> >> Original: >> If a BIER attribute is >> received from the peer, it MUST be treated exactly as if it were an >> unrecognized non-transitive attribute. That is, "it MUST be quietly >> ignored and not passed along to other BGP peers". >> --> >> >> >> 7) <!-- [rfced] Some author comments are present in the XML. Please confirm >> that no updates related to these comments are outstanding. Note that the >> comments will be deleted prior to publication. >> --> >> >> Zzh> Confirmed. >> >> >> 8) <!--[rfced] Acronyms >> >> a) Both the expansion and the acronym for the following terms are used >> throughout the document. After the first expansions, would you like to use >> only the acronyms for consistency and per the guidance from the "Web Portion >> of the Style Guide" >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/styleguide/part2/*ref_repo__;Iw!!NEt6yMaO-gk!BJ6v2FOBd8VGkYJHlaHgnjGegvKzbIUfYyr46UWCbnU9e0rwA4mbmmtftAPg1aih3Jvh2GZMI2a16x_qoiGXIx1-$ >> >? >> >> BFR Neighbor (BFR-NBR) >> Set Identifier (SI) >> >> Zzh> Yes, please. >> >> b) Per RFC 8279, may we update the following acronym expansions to the >> latter form listed for consistency? >> >> BFER = BIER Forwarding Egress Router > Bit-Forwarding Egress Router >> BFR = BIER Forwarding Router > Bit-Forwarding Router >> BIFT = BIER Forwarding Table > Bit Index Forwarding Table >> BFR-id = BIER Forwarding Router Identifier, BIER Forwarding Router >> identifier > BFR Identifier >> >> zzh> Ah, yes. Thank you. >> >> c) FYI - We have added an expansion for the following abbreviation per >> Section 3.6 of RFC 7322 ("RFC Style Guide"). Please review each expansion in >> the document carefully to ensure correctness. >> >> External BGP (EBGP) >> --> >> >> Zzh> Yes. >> >> >> 9) <!-- [rfced] Terminology >> >> a) Throughout the text, the following terminology appears to be used >> inconsistently. May we update to the latter form listed for consistency? >> >> BIER Attribute > BIER attribute >> >> BIER Path Attribute > BIER path attribute >> >> MPLS encapsulation sub-TLV, MPLS encapsulation Sub-TLV, MPLS Encapsulation >> Sub-TLV, Encapsulation sub-TLV > MPLS Encapsulation sub-TLV (per >> IANA) >> >> non-MPLS encapsulation sub-TLV, non-MPLS encapsulation Sub-TLV > >> non-MPLS Encapsulation sub-TLV (per IANA) >> >> Nexthop sub-TLV > BIER Nexthop sub-TLV (per IANA) >> >> Zzh> Yes. Thanks! >> >> b) The following terminology appears to be used inconsistently throughout >> the text. Please review and let us know if/how they may be made consistent. >> >> Nexthop vs. nexthop >> [Note that RFCs 4271, 7606, 8279, and 8296 use "next hop" (for >> general use).] >> >> Zzh> There are many "BIER Nexthop sub-TLV". I'd like to keep the capital >> there. The figure for the encoding also shows "Nexthop" and that matches >> other fields like "Length". The text related to that sub-TLV uses capital, >> and I think that is reasonable. >> Zzh> The "nexthop" (lower case) in the following three places can be changed >> to "next hop": >> >> ... If the BIER Nexthop sub-TLV is >> not included, the BIER prefix will be used by receiving BFRs as the >> BIER nexthop when calculating BIFT. >> >> --------------- >> >> When BFR2 receives the route, it calculates its BIFT entries. >> Because the route from BFER1 does not include a BIER Nexthop, BFR2 >> uses BFRer1's BFR-prefix as the nexthop. >> >> ----------------- >> >> When BFR1 receives the routes, it calculates the BIFT entries, using >> BFR2's address encoded in the BIER Nexthop sub-TLV as the nexthop. >> Because BFR2 is not directly connected, a tunnel must be used. >> >> Zzh> There are a few places where "Nexthop sub-TLV" is used w/o the >> preceding "BIER". Those should be replaced with "BIER Nexthop sub-TLV". >> Zzh> In the "6. Example of BIER Nexthop Usage and Handling", please add >> sub-TLV after Nexthop. >> >> Sub-domain vs. sub-domain >> --> >> >> Zzh> Please use "sub-domain" except in the text related to the figure about >> the encoding. >> Zzh> For example, "sub-domain" should be used in the following paragraph: >> >> When creating a BIER attribute, a BFR MUST include one BIER TLV for >> every Sub-domain that the prefix belongs to. The attribute type code >> for the BIER Attribute is TBD. The value field of the BIER Attribute >> contains one or more BIER TLV shown as follows: >> >> zzh> While "Sub-domain" can be used in the following places: >> >> 0 1 2 3 >> 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 >> >> +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+- >> | Type = 1 | Length | >> >> +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+- >> | Sub-domain | BFR-ID | Reserved | >> >> +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+- >> +AH4 +AH4 >> | Sub-TLVs | >> >> +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+-.......................... >> >> Type: 1. >> >> Length: Two octets encoding the length in octets of the Value >> part. >> >> Sub-domain [RFC8279]: ... >> >> Zzh> Thanks! >> Zzh> Jeffrey >> >> >> 10) <!-- [rfced] Please review the "Inclusive Language" portion of the >> online Style Guide >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/styleguide/part2/*inclusive_language__;Iw!!NEt6yMaO-gk!BJ6v2FOBd8VGkYJHlaHgnjGegvKzbIUfYyr46UWCbnU9e0rwA4mbmmtftAPg1aih3Jvh2GZMI2a16x_qooA8SONK$ >> > and let us know if any changes are needed. Updates of this nature >> typically result in more precise language, which is helpful for readers. >> >> Note that our script did not flag any words in particular, but this should >> still be reviewed as a best practice. >> --> >> >> >> Thank you. >> >> RFC Editor/ap/kc >> >> >> On May 27, 2025, at 5:18 PM, rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org wrote: >> >> *****IMPORTANT***** >> >> Updated 2025/05/27 >> >> RFC Author(s): >> -------------- >> >> Instructions for Completing AUTH48 >> >> Your document has now entered AUTH48. Once it has been reviewed and >> approved by you and all coauthors, it will be published as an RFC. >> If an author is no longer available, there are several remedies available as >> listed in the FAQ >> (https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/faq/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!BJ6v2FOBd8VGkYJHlaHgnjGegvKzbIUfYyr46UWCbnU9e0rwA4mbmmtftAPg1aih3Jvh2GZMI2a16x_qorCbWs3T$ >> ). >> >> You and you coauthors are responsible for engaging other parties (e.g., >> Contributors or Working Group) as necessary before providing your approval. >> >> Planning your review >> --------------------- >> >> Please review the following aspects of your document: >> >> * RFC Editor questions >> >> Please review and resolve any questions raised by the RFC Editor that >> have been included in the XML file as comments marked as >> follows: >> >> <!-- [rfced] ... --> >> >> These questions will also be sent in a subsequent email. >> >> * Changes submitted by coauthors >> >> Please ensure that you review any changes submitted by your >> coauthors. We assume that if you do not speak up that you agree to >> changes submitted by your coauthors. >> >> * Content >> >> Please review the full content of the document, as this cannot change >> once the RFC is published. Please pay particular attention to: >> - IANA considerations updates (if applicable) >> - contact information >> - references >> >> * Copyright notices and legends >> >> Please review the copyright notice and legends as defined in RFC 5378 >> and the Trust Legal Provisions (TLP +IBM >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!BJ6v2FOBd8VGkYJHlaHgnjGegvKzbIUfYyr46UWCbnU9e0rwA4mbmmtftAPg1aih3Jvh2GZMI2a16x_qorkpCTZ3$ >> ). >> >> * Semantic markup >> >> Please review the markup in the XML file to ensure that elements of >> content are correctly tagged. For example, ensure that <sourcecode> >> and <artwork> are set correctly. See details at >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://authors.ietf.org/rfcxml-vocabulary__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!BJ6v2FOBd8VGkYJHlaHgnjGegvKzbIUfYyr46UWCbnU9e0rwA4mbmmtftAPg1aih3Jvh2GZMI2a16x_qohwa_t3F$ >> >. >> >> * Formatted output >> >> Please review the PDF, HTML, and TXT files to ensure that the >> formatted output, as generated from the markup in the XML file, is >> reasonable. Please note that the TXT will have formatting >> limitations compared to the PDF and HTML. >> >> >> Submitting changes >> ------------------ >> >> To submit changes, please reply to this email using +IBg-REPLY >> ALL+IBk as all the parties CCed on this message need to see your >> changes. The parties >> include: >> >> * your coauthors >> >> * rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org (the RPC team) >> >> * other document participants, depending on the stream (e.g., >> IETF Stream participants are your working group chairs, the >> responsible ADs, and the document shepherd). >> >> * auth48archive@rfc-editor.org, which is a new archival mailing list >> to preserve AUTH48 conversations; it is not an active discussion >> list: >> >> * More info: >> >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/iet >> f-announce/yb6lpIGh-4Q9l2USxIAe6P8O4Zc__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!BJ6v2FOBd8VGkY >> JHlaHgnjGegvKzbIUfYyr46UWCbnU9e0rwA4mbmmtftAPg1aih3Jvh2GZMI2a16x_qolL >> qKqFy$ >> >> * The archive itself: >> >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ >> auth48archive/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!BJ6v2FOBd8VGkYJHlaHgnjGegvKzbIUfYyr46U >> WCbnU9e0rwA4mbmmtftAPg1aih3Jvh2GZMI2a16x_qovujzSGw$ >> >> * Note: If only absolutely necessary, you may temporarily opt out >> of the archiving of messages (e.g., to discuss a sensitive matter). >> If needed, please add a note at the top of the message that you >> have dropped the address. When the discussion is concluded, >> auth48archive@rfc-editor.org will be re-added to the CC list and >> its addition will be noted at the top of the message. >> >> You may submit your changes in one of two ways: >> >> An update to the provided XML file >> +IBQ OR +IBQ >> An explicit list of changes in this format >> >> Section # (or indicate Global) >> >> OLD: >> old text >> >> NEW: >> new text >> >> You do not need to reply with both an updated XML file and an explicit list >> of changes, as either form is sufficient. >> >> We will ask a stream manager to review and approve any changes that seem >> beyond editorial in nature, e.g., addition of new text, deletion of text, >> and technical changes. Information about stream managers can be found in >> the FAQ. Editorial changes do not require approval from a stream manager. >> >> >> Approving for publication >> -------------------------- >> >> To approve your RFC for publication, please reply to this email stating that >> you approve this RFC for publication. Please use +IBg-REPLY ALL+IBk, as all >> the parties CCed on this message need to see your approval. >> >> >> Files >> ----- >> >> The files are available here: >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc979 >> 3.xml__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!BJ6v2FOBd8VGkYJHlaHgnjGegvKzbIUfYyr46UWCbnU9e0r >> wA4mbmmtftAPg1aih3Jvh2GZMI2a16x_qokw_3RTt$ >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc979 >> 3.html__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!BJ6v2FOBd8VGkYJHlaHgnjGegvKzbIUfYyr46UWCbnU9e0 >> rwA4mbmmtftAPg1aih3Jvh2GZMI2a16x_qonasllh-$ >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc979 >> 3.pdf__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!BJ6v2FOBd8VGkYJHlaHgnjGegvKzbIUfYyr46UWCbnU9e0r >> wA4mbmmtftAPg1aih3Jvh2GZMI2a16x_qop-041dD$ >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc979 >> 3.txt__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!BJ6v2FOBd8VGkYJHlaHgnjGegvKzbIUfYyr46UWCbnU9e0r >> wA4mbmmtftAPg1aih3Jvh2GZMI2a16x_qouGvs8K2$ >> >> Diff file of the text: >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc979 >> 3-diff.html__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!BJ6v2FOBd8VGkYJHlaHgnjGegvKzbIUfYyr46UWCb >> nU9e0rwA4mbmmtftAPg1aih3Jvh2GZMI2a16x_qots0QlJN$ >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc979 >> 3-rfcdiff.html__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!BJ6v2FOBd8VGkYJHlaHgnjGegvKzbIUfYyr46U >> WCbnU9e0rwA4mbmmtftAPg1aih3Jvh2GZMI2a16x_qorEH-8sl$ (side by side) >> >> Diff of the XML: >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc979 >> 3-xmldiff1.html__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!BJ6v2FOBd8VGkYJHlaHgnjGegvKzbIUfYyr46 >> UWCbnU9e0rwA4mbmmtftAPg1aih3Jvh2GZMI2a16x_qolwW7YVW$ >> >> >> Tracking progress >> ----------------- >> >> The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here: >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9793 >> __;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!BJ6v2FOBd8VGkYJHlaHgnjGegvKzbIUfYyr46UWCbnU9e0rwA4mb >> mmtftAPg1aih3Jvh2GZMI2a16x_qovI0B0Uw$ >> >> Please let us know if you have any questions. >> >> Thank you for your cooperation, >> >> RFC Editor >> >> -------------------------------------- >> RFC9793 (draft-ietf-bier-idr-extensions-19) >> >> Title : BGP Extensions for BIER >> Author(s) : X. Xu, M. Chen, K. Patel, I. Wijnands, T. Przygienda, Z. >> Zhang >> WG Chair(s) : Tony Przygienda, Greg Shepherd >> >> Area Director(s) : Jim Guichard, Ketan Talaulikar, Gunter Van de >> Velde -- auth48archive mailing list -- auth48archive@rfc-editor.org To unsubscribe send an email to auth48archive-le...@rfc-editor.org
