Re: [bess] WG Last Call and IPR Poll for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-01.txt

[Wen Lin]

Support.

Thanks,
Wen

From: BESS  On Behalf Of Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2018 8:50 AM
To: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-in...@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org
Cc: bess-cha...@ietf.org
Subject: [bess] WG Last Call and IPR Poll for 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-01.txt

This email begins a two-week working group last call for 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-01.txt

Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group list.

We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to this 
Document, 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 an author or a contributor of this document, please 
respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant 
undisclosed IPR, copying the BESS mailing list. The document won't progress 
without answers from all the authors and contributors.

Currently there is one IPR declaration against this document.

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

We are also polling for any existing implementations.

The working group last call closes on Wednesday 11th April.

Regards,

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

Re: [bess] WG Last Call and IPR Poll for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-01.txt

[Jeff Tantsura]

Yes/support

 

Cheers,

Jeff 

From: BESS  on behalf of "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)" 

Date: Wednesday, March 28, 2018 at 5:50 AM
To: "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-in...@ietf.org" 
, "bess@ietf.org" 

Cc: "bess-cha...@ietf.org" 
Subject: [bess] WG Last Call and IPR Poll for 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-01.txt

 

This email begins a two-week working group last call for 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-01.txt

 

Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group list.

 

We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to this 
Document, 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 an author or a contributor of this document, please 
respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant 
undisclosed IPR, copying the BESS mailing list. The document won't progress 
without answers from all the authors and contributors.

Currently there is one IPR declaration against this document.

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

We are also polling for any existing implementations.

The working group last call closes on Wednesday 11th April.  

 

Regards,

Matthew and Stéphane

 

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

Re: [bess] WG Last Call and IPR Poll for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-01.txt

[Oya Luengo, Roberto (Nokia - US/Mountain View)]

Support

Thanks
Roberto

From: BESS  on behalf of "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)" 

Date: Wednesday, March 28, 2018 at 5:50 AM
To: "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-in...@ietf.org" 
, "bess@ietf.org" 

Cc: "bess-cha...@ietf.org" 
Subject: [bess] WG Last Call and IPR Poll for 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-01.txt

This email begins a two-week working group last call for 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-01.txt

Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group list.

We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to this 
Document, 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 an author or a contributor of this document, please 
respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant 
undisclosed IPR, copying the BESS mailing list. The document won't progress 
without answers from all the authors and contributors.
Currently there is one IPR declaration against this document.
If you are not listed as an author or a contributor, then please explicitly 
respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet been disclosed in 
conformance with IETF rules.
We are also polling for any existing implementations.
The working group last call closes on Wednesday 11th April.

Regards,
Matthew and Stéphane
___
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

Re: [bess] WG Last Call and IPR Poll for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-01.txt

[Nabeel Cocker]

support
thanks
nabeel


On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 8:50 AM, Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) <
matthew.bo...@nokia.com> wrote:

> This email begins a two-week working group last call for
> draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-01.txt
>
>
>
> Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group
> list.
>
>
>
> We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to
> this Document, 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 an author or a contributor of this document, please
> respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any
> relevant undisclosed IPR, copying the BESS mailing list. The document won't
> progress without answers from all the authors and contributors.
>
> Currently there is one IPR declaration against this document.
>
> If you are not listed as an author or a contributor, then please
> explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet been
> disclosed in conformance with IETF rules.
>
> We are also polling for any existing implementations.
>
> The working group last call closes on Wednesday 11th April.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Matthew and Stéphane
>
> ___
> 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 and IPR Poll for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-01.txt

[Luc Andre Burdet (lburdet)]

Support.

Thanks Ali for comment responses and taking into consideration. Cisco has been 
shipping an implementation of this since -00 timeframe.

Regards,

Luc André Burdet


From: BESS  on behalf of "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)" 

Date: Thursday, March 29, 2018 at 4:47 AM
To: Alexander Vainshtein , "Ali Sajassi 
(sajassi)" 
Cc: "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-in...@ietf.org" 
, "bess-cha...@ietf.org" 
, "bess@ietf.org" 
Subject: Re: [bess] WG Last Call and IPR Poll for 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-01.txt

Thanks for the quick turnaround.

Folks, please focus any further review and comments on the new v02 of the draft:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ/

Regards

Matthew

From: Alexander Vainshtein 
Date: Thursday, 29 March 2018 at 06:55
To: "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)" , "Ali Sajassi 
(sajassi)" 
Cc: "bess-cha...@ietf.org" , 
"draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-in...@ietf.org" 
, "bess@ietf.org" 

Subject: Re: WG Last Call and IPR Poll for 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-01.txt

Ali and all,
I have looked up the -02 revision of the draft, and the texr looks much more 
mature now.
I will read it again and send technical comments (if any) next week as well as 
my position regarding its support.
Thumb typed by Sasha Vainshtein


From: Ali Sajassi (sajassi) 
Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2018 7:20:16 AM
To: Alexander Vainshtein; Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)
Cc: bess-cha...@ietf.org; draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-in...@ietf.org; 
bess@ietf.org
Subject: Re: WG Last Call and IPR Poll for 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-01.txt

Hi Sasha,

Thanks for your comments. I took care of them all in rev02 of the document that 
I just posted.

Cheers,
Ali

From: Alexander Vainshtein 
Date: Wednesday, March 28, 2018 at 7:32 AM
To: "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)" 
Cc: "bess-cha...@ietf.org" , 
"draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-in...@ietf.org" 
, "bess@ietf.org" 

Subject: RE: WG Last Call and IPR Poll for 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-01.txt
Resent-From: 
Resent-To: Cisco Employee , , 
, 
Resent-Date: Wednesday, March 28, 2018 at 7:32 AM

Matthew, and all,
I’ve looked up the -01 version of the draft and I have found 5 references to a 
future revision of the document (all dealing with either LSM or MAC Mobility 
handling).
These references are in the following sections:

  *   3.3.2  (LSM)
  *   4.2  (MAC mobility)
  *   4.3.2 (LSM)
  *   5.2  (MAC mobility)
  *   5.3.2 (LSM)

BTW, the abbreviation “LSM” is not expanded in the document, and I admit that 
do not know what it means in the context of this draft.

I wonder whether the document in this state is ready for the WG LC because, to 
me, these references indicate that the authors do not consider their work as 
complete.

What, if anything, did I miss?

Regards, and lots of thanks in advance,
Sasha

Office: +972-39266302
Cell:  +972-549266302
Email:   alexander.vainsht...@ecitele.com

From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - 
GB)
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2018 3:50 PM
To: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-in...@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org
Cc: bess-cha...@ietf.org
Subject: [bess] WG Last Call and IPR Poll for 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-01.txt

This email begins a two-week working group last call for 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-01.txt

Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group list.

We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to this 
Document, 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 an author or a contributor of this document, please 
respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant 
undisclosed IPR, copying the BESS mailing list. The document won't progress 
without answers from all the authors and contributors.
Currently there is one IPR declaration against this document.
If you are not listed as an author or a contributor, then please explicitly 
respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet been disclosed in 
conformance with IETF rules.
We are also polling for any existing implementations.
The working group last call closes on Wednesday 11th April.

Regards,
Matthew and Stéphane

Re: [bess] WG Last Call and IPR Poll for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-01.txt

[John E Drake]

Support.  Juniper has been shipping an implementation of this draft for quite 
some time and our customers seem to find the draft to be quite useful.

Yours Irrespectively,

John

From: BESS  On Behalf Of Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2018 8:50 AM
To: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-in...@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org
Cc: bess-cha...@ietf.org
Subject: [bess] WG Last Call and IPR Poll for 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-01.txt

This email begins a two-week working group last call for 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-01.txt

Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group list.

We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to this 
Document, 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 an author or a contributor of this document, please 
respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant 
undisclosed IPR, copying the BESS mailing list. The document won't progress 
without answers from all the authors and contributors.

Currently there is one IPR declaration against this document.

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

We are also polling for any existing implementations.

The working group last call closes on Wednesday 11th April.

Regards,

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

Re: [bess] draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-bum-opt-00 - clarification on problem description

[Wen Lin]

The question is, in general,  whether we need to support more than one remote 
VTEP in this type of use case when VXLAN is used on the access side?   I think 
the answer is yes.

So the question about how to deal with “one remote VTEP verses more than one 
remote VTEP” is logically the same as “one CE verses more than one CE”.

Thanks,
Wen


From: BESS  on behalf of "Ali Sajassi (sajassi)" 

Date: Monday, March 26, 2018 at 2:54 PM
To: "UTTARO, JAMES" , John E Drake , 
"Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View)" , Eric 
Rosen , Sandy Breeze , "Satya 
Mohanty (satyamoh)" 
Cc: "Ali Sajassi (sajassi)" , "bess@ietf.org" 
Subject: Re: [bess] draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-bum-opt-00 - clarification on 
problem description

Hi Jim,

Draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-bum-opt is for a very specific use case and that use 
case is described in section 4.4 of draft-ietf-bess-dci-evpn-overlay. The 
solution for optimization for this use case could have been covered either in 
igmp-mld-proxy draft itself or it could be covered in a separate draft. I 
suggested it to be covered in a separate draft because I wasn’t keen in adding 
a new section to igmp-mld-proxy given that it is getting ready for WG LC. 
However, if people think it should be covered in igmp-mld-proxy draft then we 
can take that under consideration.

The interconnect of L2 to IRB/L3 core will be covered in the corresponding IRB 
mcast drafts.

Cheers,
Ali

From: "UTTARO, JAMES" 
Date: Monday, March 26, 2018 at 10:46 AM
To: Cisco Employee , John E Drake , 
"Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View)" , Eric 
Rosen , Sandy Breeze , "Satya 
Mohanty (satyamoh)" 
Cc: "bess@ietf.org" 
Subject: RE: [bess] draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-bum-opt-00 - clarification on 
problem description

Ali,

So, is this going to be a family of drafts dealing with 
inter-connection aspects across a set of use cases ? Would it be useful to 
right up a requirements draft like we did with EVPN??

Thanks,
Jim Uttaro

From: Ali Sajassi (sajassi) [mailto:saja...@cisco.com]
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2018 1:20 PM
To: UTTARO, JAMES ; John E Drake ; Rabadan, 
Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View) ; Eric Rosen 
; Sandy Breeze ; Satya Mohanty 
(satyamoh) 
Cc: bess@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [bess] draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-bum-opt-00 - clarification on 
problem description

Hi Jim,

draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-bum-opt will focus on L2 only between EVPN overlay 
(VxLAN) access domain and EVPN MPLS core. Connectivity EVPN IRB core (or EVPN 
L3 core) will be covered in the other drafts that I mentioned below because 
they are  already doing it for other use cases.

Cheers,
Ali

From: "UTTARO, JAMES" >
Date: Monday, March 26, 2018 at 10:03 AM
To: Cisco Employee >, John E Drake 
>, "Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - 
US/Mountain View)" >, 
Eric Rosen >, Sandy Breeze 
>, "Satya Mohanty 
(satyamoh)" >
Cc: "bess@ietf.org" >
Subject: RE: [bess] draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-bum-opt-00 - clarification on 
problem description

Ali,

So is the plan to incorporate Sandy’s work in these docs??

Thanks,
Jim Uttaro


From: Ali Sajassi (sajassi) [mailto:saja...@cisco.com]
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2018 11:55 AM
To: UTTARO, JAMES >; John E Drake 
>; Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - 
US/Mountain View) >; 
Eric Rosen >; Sandy Breeze 
>; Satya Mohanty 
(satyamoh) >
Cc: bess@ietf.org; Ali Sajassi (sajassi) 
>
Subject: Re: [bess] draft-mohanty-bess-evpn-bum-opt-00 - clarification on 
problem description


Hi Jim,

Wrt multicast for L2 EVPN<-> L3 EVPN, that should be covered in corresponding 
EVPN multicast drafts:

[bess] REMINDER: Poll to park almost dead WG documents

[stephane.litkowski]

Hi,

This is just a reminder for this on-going polling.
In one week, these documents will be parked if we do not see a consensus on 
progressing them.

Brgds,


From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of 
stephane.litkow...@orange.com
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2018 11:09
To: bess@ietf.org
Subject: [bess] Poll to park almost dead WG documents

Hi WG,

During our meeting in London we have started to get a status on some WG 
documents that have expired.
It looks that some documents does not have support and editor anymore.

This email starts a two weeks poll to hear from you:

-  If you would like to see the documents progressing or not

-  If you volunteer to take over the work on one or more of these 
documents

Please provide your feedback on a per document basis to the list by replying to 
this email.

* The poll ends April 9th *

Please note that by default the document will be parked. To get them alive 
again, we need a  significant amount of support as well as one or more 
volunteer to take over the work. Without those conditions being cleared, a 
document will be parked.

We absolutely need your feedback as we do not want to park a work which has 
still an interest for the working group.

Here is the list of documents we are polling for:

-  draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-pe-ce

-  draft-ietf-bess-virtual-pe

-  draft-ietf-bess-end-system-requirements

-  draft-ietf-bess-evpn-trill

-  draft-ietf-l3vpn-end-system


Thanks for your help,

Best Regards,

Stephane & Matthew

_



Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc

pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce 
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler

a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,

Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
falsifie. Merci.



This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
information that may be protected by law;

they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.

If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
this message and its attachments.

As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
modified, changed or falsified.

Thank you.

_

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce 
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.

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

Re: [bess] WGLC on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-df-election-framework

[stephane.litkowski]

Hi Ali,

Thanks, it looks good

Brgds,


From: Ali Sajassi (sajassi) [mailto:saja...@cisco.com]
Sent: Monday, April 02, 2018 20:47
To: LITKOWSKI Stephane OBS/OINIS; Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View); 
bess@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [bess] WGLC on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-df-election-framework


Hi Stephane,

How about modifying the sentence to:

“ HRW and AC-DF mechanisms are independent of each other. Therefore, a PE MAY 
support either HRW or AC-DF independently or MAY support both of them together. 
A PE MAY also support AC-DF capability along with existing DF election 
mechanism per [RFC7432].”

Basically, what we are saying is that these two mechanisms are independent of 
each other and they don’t have to be implemented together. If an operator wants 
compliancy with this document, then it needs to specify if they want full 
compliancy (which is implementation of both mechanisms) or partial compliancy 
(which is implementation of one of the mechanisms).

Regards,
Ali

From: "stephane.litkow...@orange.com" 
>
Date: Wednesday, March 28, 2018 at 11:50 PM
To: Cisco Employee >, "Rabadan, 
Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View)" 
>, 
"bess@ietf.org" >
Subject: RE: [bess] WGLC on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-df-election-framework

Hi Ali,

This paragraph points that HRW and AC-DF may be USED independently, but this 
does say that a vendor OS may implement HRW or AC-DF or both.
I see two issues if it is not clarified:

  *   When an operator pushes a RFP requesting support of this draft, both HRW 
and AC-DF support are defacto required
  *   From a WG standpoint, to progress further the document we need an 
implementation that supports fully the draft so both HRW and AC-DF.

My point is really on the implementation side, not on the usage.


Brgds,


From: Ali Sajassi (sajassi) [mailto:saja...@cisco.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2018 18:44
To: LITKOWSKI Stephane OBS/OINIS; Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View); 
bess@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [bess] WGLC on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-df-election-framework


Hi Stephane,

In section 2.3, it says that:

Both, HRW and AC-DF MAY be used independently or simultaneously.
 The AC-DF capability MAY be used with the default DF Election
 algorithm too.
Do you want further clarification? If so, please suggest text.

Thanks,
Ali

From: BESS > on behalf of 
"stephane.litkow...@orange.com" 
>
Date: Wednesday, March 28, 2018 at 12:50 AM
To: "Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View)" 
>, 
"bess@ietf.org" >
Subject: Re: [bess] WGLC on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-df-election-framework

Hi Jorge,

More inline

From: Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View) [mailto:jorge.raba...@nokia.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2018 00:38
To: LITKOWSKI Stephane OBS/OINIS; bess@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [bess] WGLC on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-df-election-framework

Hi Stephane,

Please see in-line.
Thanks.
Jorge

From: BESS > on behalf of 
"stephane.litkow...@orange.com" 
>
Date: Tuesday, March 27, 2018 at 8:48 AM
To: "bess@ietf.org" >
Subject: Re: [bess] WGLC on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-df-election-framework

Hi Authors,

Speaking as a WG member, I have two comments:

-  As I have pointed during the BESS meeting, it would be good to have 
a clear definition of what is a DF type vs a capability.
[JORGE] yes, we can clarify this in the next rev along with any other comments 
made during this LC.


-  I think it would be good to have the draft telling that the 
implementation of HRW and AC-DF are optionals.
[JORGE] Is that necessary? Since the draft is not updating RFC7432, aren’t 
those options implicitly optional for RFC7432 implementations?
[SLI] I was more thinking about people implementing this draft (future RFC). 
Should they implement both HRW and AC-DF ? I don’t think so.


Brgds,

Stephane

From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of 
stephane.litkow...@orange.com
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2018 16:21
To: bess@ietf.org
Subject: [bess] WGLC on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-df-election-framework


Hello working group,



This email starts a two-week Working Group Last Call on 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-df-election-framework-00 [1]



This poll runs until *the 9th