Speaking as WG member:

Aijun, 

> On Apr 28, 2025, at 5:35 AM, Aijun Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Hi, Acee:
> 
> The reason that I response your mail are the followings:
> 1) Your belief that "Standards Track" is the right status " for this WGLC 
> document is WRONG-----As the authors declared, the newly defined "U"/"UP" 
> flag is only for stating the unreachable reason, which is unsuitable for IGP 
> protocol, and aren't enough for the operator.

This is consistent with what is signaled for IS-IS graceful restart reason - 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc8706/


> 2) There are issues MUST be solved before its WGLC. Implement or test the 
> solution in one small demo situation is far from for it to cope with the 
> complex scenarios in the real operator's network.

This is only your opinion - the number of Emails you send doesn't make it 
right. 


> 3) There is other more comprehensive solution for the aimed scenarios.

Show me your implementation. 

Acee



> 
> I know you have some preference. But let's focus on the technical arguments.
> 
> Best Regards
> 
> Aijun Wang
> China Telecom
> 
> 
> -----邮件原件-----
> 发件人: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] 代表 
> Acee Lindem
> 发送时间: 2025年4月26日 9:02
> 收件人: Aijun Wang <[email protected]>
> 抄送: Yingzhen Qu <[email protected]>; lsr <[email protected]>
> 主题: [Lsr] Re: WG Last Call for draft-ietf-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce 
> (4/17/2025 - 5/2/2025)
> 
> Aijun, 
> Why are you replying to my response to the WG publication poll? Please cease 
> and desist with your behavior of responding randomly to others poll responses 
> or comments on drafts other than your own. 
> This is NOT a discussion of your draft. 
> Acee
> 
> 
>> On Apr 25, 2025, at 5:44 PM, Aijun Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi, Acee:
>> 
>> For RFC standards, implement them is not the most challenge part, 
>> deploy/test them in various complex scenarios is more difficult part.
>> 
>> If the WGLC document rely solely on the existing LSinfinity(which is also 
>> debatable)then nothing needs to be Standardized.
>> 
>> And to your previous responses for the copycat behavior of the WGLC 
>> document——I am not argue with the implementation of prefix list—-it’s the 
>> Founder Draft[1] first propose the control knob at the ABR, even the 
>> ephemeral advertisements control.
>> 
>> There are also other control knobs that are described in the Founder 
>> Draft[1].
>> 
>> Without these control knobs, the naked signaling will introduce more 
>> potential threats to the network——This is a reminder to the supporter that 
>> declares to try to deploy it based solely on the current WGLC document.
>> 
>> [1] 
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-14
>> 
>> 
>> Aijun Wang
>> China Telecom
>> 
>>> On Apr 26, 2025, at 05:21, Acee Lindem <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Speaking as WG member:
>>> 
>>> I support publication of this draft. Given that ephemeral notification is a 
>>> new form of IGP advertisement, I had originally thought it should be an 
>>> experimental document. However, I see the function getting widespread 
>>> multi-vendor support and believe "Standards Track" is the right status. 
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Acee
>>> 
>>>> On Apr 17, 2025, at 2:13 PM, Yingzhen Qu <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hi,
>>>> 
>>>> This email begins a 2 week WG Last Call for the following draft:
>>>> IGP Unreachable Prefix Announcement
>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce/
>>>> 
>>>> Please review the document and indicate your support or objections by May 
>>>> 2nd, 2025.
>>>> 
>>>> Authors and contributors,
>>>> Please indicate to the list your knowledge of any IPR related to this work.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Yingzhen
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Lsr mailing list -- [email protected]
>>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Lsr mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
> 

_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to