Xu, I am not talking about the draft. I am asking about the patent ?
if you are using BGP communities to carry policy information what is in there which is novel and which requires IPR ? Thx, R. > Robert, > >> -----邮件原件----- >> 发件人: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] 代表 Robert >> Raszuk >> 发送时间: 2010年6月25日 19:26 >> 收件人: [email protected] >> 主题: Re: [GROW] IPR Disclosure: Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd's Statement > about >> IPR related to draft-ietf-grow-va-02 >> >> Folks, >> >> I (as both individual contributor as well as co-author of VA draft) >> fully agree with Chris that if needed simple use of BGP communities can >> be applied within given domain to carry any form of local policy across >> iBGP mesh - that applies to both prefix groups/lists and popular >> prefixes using VA terminology. > >> Reinventing the wheel with some other tool other then those which >> already have been successfully used for years makes no sense to me. > > Agree. Actually the auto-configuration mechanism defined in va-auto draft > DOES use the BGP community to carry the "can-suppress" tag which determines > whether or not the prefix should be suppressed. Hence, we are not > reinventing the wheel, and that is why the draft is just informational, > rather than standard track. > > Best wishes, > Xiaohu > >> With this in mind I am completely not clear what such IPR filing could >> be about. Are we discussing IPR of carrying local policy by BGP >> communities ? That I am afraid has a decent prior art to 2007 filing. >> >> Many thx, >> R. _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
