Re: [bess] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding-03

2017-02-13 Thread Satya Mohanty (satyamoh) 
Support.



Thanks,
—Satya

>
>On 2/13/17, 11:07 PM, "BESS on behalf of Martin Vigoureux" 
> wrote:
>
>Hello Working Group,
>
>This email starts a Working Group Last Call on 
>draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding-03 [1] which is considered 
>mature and ready for a final working group review.
>Note that this call is longer than usual because we are pushing two 
>correlated documents together.
>
>Please read this document if you haven't read the most recent
>version yet, and send your comments to the list, no later than
>*5th of March*.
>Note that this is *not only* a call for comments on the document; it is 
>also a call for support (or not) to publish this document as a Proposed 
>Standard RFC.
>
>*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that 
>applies to draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding, 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 of
>draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding-03 please respond to this 
>email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR.
>
>Note that, as of today, no IPR has been disclosed against this document 
>or its earlier versions.
>
>We are also polling for knowledge of implementations of part or all of 
>what this document specifies. This information is expected as per [2]. 
>Please inform the mailing list, or the chairs, or only one of the chairs.
>
>Thank you,
>M
>
>[1] 
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding/
>[2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/cG3X1tTqb_vPC4rg56SEdkjqDpw
>
>___
>BESS mailing list
>BESS@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
>
>
>___
>BESS mailing list
>BESS@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
___
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

Re: [bess] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement-04

2017-02-13 Thread Gaurav Dawra (gdawra) 
Support.

Regards,

-Gaurav




On 2/13/17, 2:07 PM, "BESS on behalf of Martin Vigoureux"
 wrote:

>Hello Working Group,
>
>This email starts a Working Group Last Call on
>draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement-04 [1] which is considered
>mature and ready for a final working group review.
>Note that this call is longer than usual because we are pushing two
>correlated documents together.
>
>Please read this document if you haven't read the most recent
>version yet, and send your comments to the list, no later than
>*5th of March*.
>Note that this is *not only* a call for comments on the document; it is
>also a call for support (or not) to publish this document as a Proposed
>Standard RFC.
>
>*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that
>applies to draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement, 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 of
>draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement-04 please respond to this
>email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR.
>
>Note that, as of today, no IPR has been disclosed against this document
>or its earlier versions.
>
>We are also polling for knowledge of implementations of part or all of
>what this document specifies. This information is expected as per [2].
>Please inform the mailing list, or the chairs, or only one of the chairs.
>
>Thank you,
>M
>
>[1] 
>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement
>/
>[2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/cG3X1tTqb_vPC4rg56SEdkjqDpw
>
>___
>BESS mailing list
>BESS@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

___
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

Re: [bess] [ALU] WG Last Call fordraft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding-03

2017-02-13 Thread Oya Luengo, Roberto (Nokia - US) 
Support

On 2/13/17, 2:07 PM, "BESS on behalf of Martin Vigoureux"
 wrote:

>Hello Working Group,
>
>This email starts a Working Group Last Call on
>draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding-03 [1] which is considered
>mature and ready for a final working group review.
>Note that this call is longer than usual because we are pushing two
>correlated documents together.
>
>Please read this document if you haven't read the most recent
>version yet, and send your comments to the list, no later than
>*5th of March*.
>Note that this is *not only* a call for comments on the document; it is
>also a call for support (or not) to publish this document as a Proposed
>Standard RFC.
>
>*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that
>applies to draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding, 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 of
>draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding-03 please respond to this
>email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR.
>
>Note that, as of today, no IPR has been disclosed against this document
>or its earlier versions.
>
>We are also polling for knowledge of implementations of part or all of
>what this document specifies. This information is expected as per [2].
>Please inform the mailing list, or the chairs, or only one of the chairs.
>
>Thank you,
>M
>
>[1] 
>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forward
>ing/
>[2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/cG3X1tTqb_vPC4rg56SEdkjqDpw
>
>___
>BESS mailing list
>BESS@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

___
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

Re: [bess] [ALU] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement-04

2017-02-13 Thread Oya Luengo, Roberto (Nokia - US) 
Support

On 2/13/17, 2:07 PM, "BESS on behalf of Martin Vigoureux"
 wrote:

>Hello Working Group,
>
>This email starts a Working Group Last Call on
>draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement-04 [1] which is considered
>mature and ready for a final working group review.
>Note that this call is longer than usual because we are pushing two
>correlated documents together.
>
>Please read this document if you haven't read the most recent
>version yet, and send your comments to the list, no later than
>*5th of March*.
>Note that this is *not only* a call for comments on the document; it is
>also a call for support (or not) to publish this document as a Proposed
>Standard RFC.
>
>*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that
>applies to draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement, 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 of
>draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement-04 please respond to this
>email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR.
>
>Note that, as of today, no IPR has been disclosed against this document
>or its earlier versions.
>
>We are also polling for knowledge of implementations of part or all of
>what this document specifies. This information is expected as per [2].
>Please inform the mailing list, or the chairs, or only one of the chairs.
>
>Thank you,
>M
>
>[1] 
>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement
>/
>[2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/cG3X1tTqb_vPC4rg56SEdkjqDpw
>
>___
>BESS mailing list
>BESS@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

___
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

Re: [bess] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement-04

2017-02-13 Thread Acee Lindem (acee) 
Support.
Thanks,
Acee 

On 2/13/17, 5:07 PM, "BESS on behalf of Martin Vigoureux"
 wrote:

>Hello Working Group,
>
>This email starts a Working Group Last Call on
>draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement-04 [1] which is considered
>mature and ready for a final working group review.
>Note that this call is longer than usual because we are pushing two
>correlated documents together.
>
>Please read this document if you haven't read the most recent
>version yet, and send your comments to the list, no later than
>*5th of March*.
>Note that this is *not only* a call for comments on the document; it is
>also a call for support (or not) to publish this document as a Proposed
>Standard RFC.
>
>*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that
>applies to draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement, 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 of
>draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement-04 please respond to this
>email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR.
>
>Note that, as of today, no IPR has been disclosed against this document
>or its earlier versions.
>
>We are also polling for knowledge of implementations of part or all of
>what this document specifies. This information is expected as per [2].
>Please inform the mailing list, or the chairs, or only one of the chairs.
>
>Thank you,
>M
>
>[1] 
>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement
>/
>[2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/cG3X1tTqb_vPC4rg56SEdkjqDpw
>
>___
>BESS mailing list
>BESS@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

___
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

Re: [bess] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement-04

2017-02-13 Thread Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US) 
As co-author, I support this document for publication as Standard RFC.
Not aware of any IPR.
Thanks.
Jorge

On 2/13/17, 11:07 PM, "BESS on behalf of Martin Vigoureux" 
 wrote:

Hello Working Group,

This email starts a Working Group Last Call on 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement-04 [1] which is considered 
mature and ready for a final working group review.
Note that this call is longer than usual because we are pushing two 
correlated documents together.

Please read this document if you haven't read the most recent
version yet, and send your comments to the list, no later than
*5th of March*.
Note that this is *not only* a call for comments on the document; it is 
also a call for support (or not) to publish this document as a Proposed 
Standard RFC.

*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that 
applies to draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement, 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 of
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement-04 please respond to this 
email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR.

Note that, as of today, no IPR has been disclosed against this document 
or its earlier versions.

We are also polling for knowledge of implementations of part or all of 
what this document specifies. This information is expected as per [2]. 
Please inform the mailing list, or the chairs, or only one of the chairs.

Thank you,
M

[1] 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement/
[2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/cG3X1tTqb_vPC4rg56SEdkjqDpw

___
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess


___
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

Re: [bess] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement-04

2017-02-13 Thread Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE) 
Support as co-author, not aware of IPR related to this draft

On 14/02/2017, 00:07, "BESS on behalf of Martin Vigoureux" 
 wrote:

Hello Working Group,

This email starts a Working Group Last Call on 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement-04 [1] which is considered 
mature and ready for a final working group review.
Note that this call is longer than usual because we are pushing two 
correlated documents together.

Please read this document if you haven't read the most recent
version yet, and send your comments to the list, no later than
*5th of March*.
Note that this is *not only* a call for comments on the document; it is 
also a call for support (or not) to publish this document as a Proposed 
Standard RFC.

*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that 
applies to draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement, 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 of
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement-04 please respond to this 
email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR.

Note that, as of today, no IPR has been disclosed against this document 
or its earlier versions.

We are also polling for knowledge of implementations of part or all of 
what this document specifies. This information is expected as per [2]. 
Please inform the mailing list, or the chairs, or only one of the chairs.

Thank you,
M

[1] 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement/
[2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/cG3X1tTqb_vPC4rg56SEdkjqDpw

___
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess


___
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

Re: [bess] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement-04

2017-02-13 Thread Patrice Brissette (pbrisset) 
I support.

Regards,
Patrice Brissette

On 2017-02-13, 5:07 PM, "BESS on behalf of Martin Vigoureux" 
 wrote:

Hello Working Group,

This email starts a Working Group Last Call on 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement-04 [1] which is considered 
mature and ready for a final working group review.
Note that this call is longer than usual because we are pushing two 
correlated documents together.

Please read this document if you haven't read the most recent
version yet, and send your comments to the list, no later than
*5th of March*.
Note that this is *not only* a call for comments on the document; it is 
also a call for support (or not) to publish this document as a Proposed 
Standard RFC.

*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that 
applies to draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement, 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 of
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement-04 please respond to this 
email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR.

Note that, as of today, no IPR has been disclosed against this document 
or its earlier versions.

We are also polling for knowledge of implementations of part or all of 
what this document specifies. This information is expected as per [2]. 
Please inform the mailing list, or the chairs, or only one of the chairs.

Thank you,
M

[1] 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement/
[2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/cG3X1tTqb_vPC4rg56SEdkjqDpw

___
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess


___
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

[bess] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding-03

2017-02-13 Thread Martin Vigoureux 

Hello Working Group,

This email starts a Working Group Last Call on 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding-03 [1] which is considered 
mature and ready for a final working group review.
Note that this call is longer than usual because we are pushing two 
correlated documents together.


Please read this document if you haven't read the most recent
version yet, and send your comments to the list, no later than
*5th of March*.
Note that this is *not only* a call for comments on the document; it is 
also a call for support (or not) to publish this document as a Proposed 
Standard RFC.


*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that 
applies to draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding, 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 of
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding-03 please respond to this 
email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR.


Note that, as of today, no IPR has been disclosed against this document 
or its earlier versions.


We are also polling for knowledge of implementations of part or all of 
what this document specifies. This information is expected as per [2]. 
Please inform the mailing list, or the chairs, or only one of the chairs.


Thank you,
M

[1] 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding/

[2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/cG3X1tTqb_vPC4rg56SEdkjqDpw

___
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

[bess] Chairs: Please consider adoption of draft-mackie-bess-nsh-bgp-control-plane

2017-02-13 Thread Adrian Farrel 
Hi chairs,

This draft has been around the block and had its tyres kicked. It has been
presented in BESS and SFC, and received some discussion on and off the list that
has led to updates and improvements. 

So far, as far as I can tell, no-one has screamed, "Don't do that!" 

It seems to the authors that this draft directly addressed an item in the BESS
charter, viz.
> - Extensions to BGP-enabled VPN solutions for the
>   construction of virtual topologies in support of services
>   such as Service Function Chaining.

So we would like you to consider adopting this document and working on it as a
BESS WG document.

Thanks,
Adrian

___
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

Re: [bess] WG feedback on early allocation requests for new EVPN Route types

2017-02-13 Thread Martin Vigoureux 

WG,

we haven't heard any opposition to proceeding with this early allocation.
We will thus move forward.

-m

Le 31/01/2017 à 11:55, Martin Vigoureux a écrit :

Dear WG,

we have received early allocation requests from the authors of
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement and
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-bum-procedure-updates: (see details below).

Please let us know if you are aware of any code-point conflict, or
if you have issues with the WG moving forward with this early allocation.

We envisage to proceed with the request on the 6th of February.

Thank you
M

---
"EVPN Route Types" from registry defined by RFC7432
https://www.iana.org/assignments/evpn/evpn.xhtml

5 - IP Prefix route
9 - Per-Region I-PMSI A-D route
   10 - S-PMSI A-D route
   11 - Leaf A-D route
---

___
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess



___
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

Re: [bess] BGP common parameter Yang module

2017-02-13 Thread Xufeng Liu 
In EVPN, as Patrice described, the structure is:

 

  | +--rw bgp-parameters

  | |  +--rw common

  | | +--rw rd-rt* [route-distinguisher]

  | |+--rw route-distinguisherstring

  | |+--rw vpn-target* [rt-value]

  | |   +--rw rt-valuestring

  | |   +--rw rt-type bgp-rt-type

 

In L2VPN, the structure is:

 +--ro bgp-auto-discovery

 |  +--ro route-distinguisher?   string

 |  +--ro vpn-target* [rt-value]

 |  |  +--ro rt-valuestring

 |  |  +--ro rt-type bgp-rt-type

 

In L3VPN, the current structure is:

  +--rw route-distinguisher

  |  +--rw config

  |  |  +--rw rd?   string

  +--rw ipv4

  |  +--rw unicast

  | +--rw route-targets

  | |  +--rw config

  | |  |  +--rw rts* [rt]

  | |  |  |  +--rw rt string

  | |  |  |  +--rw rt-type?   Enumeration

  +--rw ipv6

 +--rw unicast

+--rw route-targets

|  +--rw config

|  |  +--rw rts* [rt]

|  |  |  +--rw rt string

|  |  |  +--rw rt-type?   enumeration

 

Hi Dhanendra and All, 

Are we ok to move the route targets section out of the AF specific location
to where RD is specified? If so, we can define the following common
grouping:

 

 |  +--ro route-distinguisher?   string

 |  +--ro vpn-target* [rt-value]

 |  |  +--ro rt-valuestring

 |  |  +--ro rt-type bgp-rt-type

 

Otherwise, we can only define a grouping without the RD:

 

 |  +--ro vpn-target* [rt-value]

 |  |  +--ro rt-valuestring

 |  |  +--ro rt-type bgp-rt-type

Thanks,

- Xufeng

 

 

From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee)
Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2017 12:46 PM
To: Patrice Brissette (pbrisset) ; Jeff Tantsura
; Giles Heron 
Cc: draft-ietf-rtgwg-routing-ty...@ietf.org; Dhanendra Jain (dhjain)
; bess@ietf.org; Shah, Himanshu 
Subject: Re: [bess] BGP common parameter Yang module

 

Given that there is no paucity of authors and contributors on these three
BESS YANG models, I'd hope that one of them could provide a suggested common
grouping. For now, I've added the route-target-type type on which there
seems to be consensus. 

 

Thanks,

Acee  

 

From: "Patrice Brissette (pbrisset)"  >
Date: Saturday, February 11, 2017 at 8:23 AM
To: Jeff Tantsura 
>, Acee Lindem  >, Giles Heron
 >
Cc: Himanshu Shah  >,
"bess@ietf.org  "  >, "Dhanendra Jain (dhjain)"  >
Subject: Re: [bess] BGP common parameter Yang module

 

Hi Folks,

 

Same here. Can we do something about it?  And agree, all 3 VPN models should
have the same commonality.

 

Regards,

Patrice Brissette

 

From: Jeff Tantsura  >
Date: Friday, February 10, 2017 at 2:43 PM
To: "Acee Lindem (acee)"  >, Giles
Heron  >
Cc: Patrice Brissette  >,
"Shah, Himanshu"  >, "bess@ietf.org
 "  >, "Dhanendra
Jain (dhjain)"  >
Subject: Re: [bess] BGP common parameter Yang module

 

I'd prefer common grouping indraft-ietf-rtgwg-routing-types and references
from any other model using it 

 

 

Cheers,

Jeff

 

 

From: BESS  > on behalf
of "Acee Lindem (acee)"  >
Date: Friday, February 10, 2017 at 08:42
To: Giles Heron  >
Cc: "Patrice Brissette (pbrisset)"  >, "Shah, Himanshu"  >, "bess@ietf.org  "
 >, "Dhanendra Jain (dhjain)"
 >
Subject: Re: [bess] BGP common parameter Yang module

 

Hi Giles,

I will add the route-target-type type (enum of import, export, both) but for
a general grouping, it appears there are some discrepancies between the 3
models. Assuming the types: route-discriminator, route-target, and
route-target-type, can you provide a consensus grouping that all the models
would