I support this adoption.

Some comments:

The draft supports root/leaf Ethernet segment (case 3), it should state out the 
forwarding rules among root/leaf ES, root ES, and leaf ES. 

Scenarios 2 and scenarios 3 are different. Case 3 is a case 2, but case 2 is 
not a case 3. It is necessary for the draft to point out this and make clear 
for the operation on case 3. 

Cheers,
Lucy

-----Original Message-----
From: BESS [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Thomas Morin
Sent: Monday, February 02, 2015 8:03 AM
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-sajassi-bess-evpn-etree

Hello working group,

This email starts a two-week poll on adopting
draft-sajassi-bess-evpn-etree-00 [1] as a working group item.

Please send comments to the list and state if you support adoption or not (in 
the later case, please also state the reasons).

This poll runs until **February 16th**.


*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that applies to 
this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR 
rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details).

==> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to 
this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR.

The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from each 
author and contributor.

If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please explicitly 
respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet been disclosed in 
conformance with IETF rules.

Thank you,

Martin & Thomas
bess chairs

[1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sajassi-bess-evpn-etree

_______________________________________________
BESS mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

_______________________________________________
BESS mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

Reply via email to