Hello John, Thanks for your quick reply, even if I am unsure how to read " Yours Irrespectively," as I am not an English-native person.
Thank you for pointing me to the new sections 9.1.2 & others => I will update my DISCUSS on this point w/o sending another email. But section 1 still mentions only IGMP and never MLD except for "IGMP/MLD" proxy, this is trivial to fix, so I suggest to the authors to update the draft. Regards -éric -----Original Message----- From: iesg <[email protected]> on behalf of John E Drake <[email protected]> Date: Friday, 4 March 2022 at 15:01 To: Eric Vyncke <[email protected]>, The IESG <[email protected]> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: RE: Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy-18: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) Hi, Snipped, comments inline Yours Irrespectively, John Juniper Business Use Only > -----Original Message----- > DISCUSS: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > As Martin Vigoureux's term is near its end, I took the liberty to re-evaluate the > ballot status of this document and clearing parts of my original block DISCUSS > points and many of my original non-blocking COMMENT points. > > See below this line for updated version > ---------------------------------------------- > > Thank you for the work put into this document. I have to state that I am neither > a EVPN expert not a multicast one. > > Please find below some blocking DISCUSS points (probably easy to address), > some non-blocking COMMENT points (but replies would be appreciated even if > only for my own education), and some nits. > > Special thanks to Stéphane Litkowski for his shepherd's write-up about the WG > consensus. > > I hope that this helps to improve the document, > > Regards, > > -éric > > == DISCUSS == > > The text covers in details how to map MLD/IGMP into BGP routes but does not > say a word on how to recreate the MLD/IGMP packets. Should there be any such > specification (e.g., in section 4.1) ? [JD] We added: 9.1.2. Reconstructing IGMP / MLD Membership Reports from Selective Multicast Route 9.2.2. Reconstructing IGMP / MLD Membership Reports from Multicast Membership Report Sync Route 9.3.2. Reconstructing IGMP / MLD Leave from Multicast Leave Sync Route > > -- Section 1 -- > In the same vein, is it about IGMP only ? Or does it include MLD as well ? It is > really unclear. [JD] The Abstract states: This document describes how to support efficiently endpoints running IGMP (Internet Group Management Protocol) or MLD (Multicast Listener Discovery) for the multicast services over an EVPN network by incorporating IGMP/MLD proxy procedures on EVPN (Ethernet VPN) PEs. We also added this paragraph to section 3 at Ben's behest: It is important to note when there is text considering whether a PE indicates support for IGMP proxying, the corresponding behavior has a natural analogue for indication of support for MLD proxying, and the analogous requirements apply as well. _______________________________________________ BESS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
